Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 13 Review scientific article / Pregledni znanstveni članek SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF SUSTAINABLE FOREST MANAGEMENT: INTEGRATING COMMUNITY FORESTRY AND AGROFORESTRY APPROACHES SISTEMATIČNI PREGLED TRAJNOSTNEGA GOSPODARJENJA Z GOZDOVI: INTEGRACIJA SKUPNOSTNEGA GOZDARSTVA IN PRISTOPOV KMETIJSKO- GOZDARSKIH SISTEMOV Komang ARIYANTO1 (1) University of Lampung, Department of Sociology, Indonesia, komangariyanto998@gmail.com ABSTRACT This systematic review addresses the need for integrating social, ecological, and economic dimensions into sustainable forest ma- nagement to enhance resilience and sustainability. Existing research reveals a gap in understanding community involvement and governance effectiveness. The review synthesizes findings from diverse studies, focusing on community forestry and agroforestry practices. An analysis of 48 peer-reviewed articles and case studies was conducted to identify the best practices and key themes. Results indicate that robust institutions and effective governance are essential for sustainable forest management. Community engagement and education significantly enhance sustainable practices, with fiscal subsidies in forestry proving more effective than agricultural subsidies. Agroforestry emerges as a strategy that boosts agricultural income and biodiversity through improved market access. The conclusions emphasize the need to address social inequalities and urban pressures while fostering communi- ty participation for effective forest management. Recommendations include strengthening institutional frameworks, promoting education for sustainable practices, developing targeted policies that address identified barriers, and leveraging community par- ticipation in decision-making processes. Keywords: agroforestry systems, community forestry, institutional governance, sustainable forest management IZVLEČEK Ta sistematični pregled se ukvarja s potrebo po integraciji socialnih, ekoloških in ekonomskih dimenzij v trajnostnem upravljanju goz- dov za krepitev odpornosti in trajnosti. Obstoječe raziskave razkrivajo vrzel v razumevanju vključevanja skupnosti in učinkovitost up- ravljanja. Pregled sintetizira ugotovitve iz različnih raziskav, osredotoča se na prakse skupnostnega gozdarstva in kmetijsko-gozdarskih sistemov. Izvedena je bila analiza 48 recenziranih člankov in študiji primerov za opredelitev najboljših praks ter ključnih tem. Rezultati kažejo, da so aktivne institucije in učinkovito upravljanje ključnega pomena za trajnostno upravljanje gozdov. Vključevanje skupnosti in izobraževanje pomembno izboljšujeta trajnostne prakse, pri čemer so ekonomske spodbude v gozdarstvu učinkovitejše od tistih v kmetijstvu. Kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi se izkažejo kot način, ki povečuje kmetijski dohodek in krepi biotsko raznovrstnost prek tudi preprostejšega dostopa do trgov, saj ti sistemi zagotavljajo večjo raznolikost proizvodov. V zaključkih poudarjamo potrebo po obravnavi socialne neenakosti in pritiskov urbanizacije, hkrati pa izpostavljamo pomen sodelovanja skupnosti. Priporočila vključujejo krepitev institucionalnih okvirov, spodbujanje izobraževanja za trajnostne prakse, razvoj ciljno usmerjenih politik, ki obravnavajo jasno opre- deljene ovire, ter sodelovanje skupnosti v procesih odločanja. Ključne besede: kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi, skupnostno gozdarstvo, institucionalno upravljanje, trajnostno upravljanje gozdov GDK 26(045)=111 Received / Prispelo: 16. 08. 2024 DOI 10.20315/ASetL.135.2 Accepted / Sprejeto: 21. 10. 2024 1 INTRODUCTION 1 UVOD Agroforestry, which integrates trees with crops or livestock, is widely recognized as a promising approach for achieving sustainable agriculture and forestry. This approach has the potential to address various ecologi- cal, economic, and social challenges, including biodi- versity conservation, climate change adaptation and mitigation, ecosystem restoration, and rural develop- ment (Wilson and Lovell, 2016; Montagnini, 2017; Quandt et al., 2023). Despite its benefits, there is a need to synthesize existing knowledge on agroforestry, iden- tify key success factors, and highlight best practices ap- plicable across different contexts. A study by Plieninger et al. (2020) emphasizes that agroforestry requires an interdisciplinary approach that considers ecological, agricultural, and socioeconomic factors. Consequently, this study aims to investigate the integration of sustain- able forest management practices with agroforestry to enhance environmental sustainability. It will focus on the ecological, social, and economic aspects to contrib- ute to the development of more effective and sustain- 14 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... able agroforestry practices. Challenges remain, such as integrating traditional knowledge, improving market access for agroforestry products, and scaling up suc- cessful systems (Montagnini, 2017). Agroforestry is emerging as a viable alternative to monoculture pro- duction, offering a more sustainable and holistic ap- proach to land management (Nair, 2007). This research is crucial for addressing environmental degradation and supporting sustainable development. Although studies have demonstrated the benefits of sustainable forest management (SFM) and agroforest- ry practices, further research is needed on how these approaches can be effectively integrated to achieve environmental sustainability (van Noordwijk, 2019; Lintangah et al., 2022). The social and economic im- plications of agroforestry practices are not well under- stood, and more investigation is required to explore their potential for scaling up and integration into SFM strategies (Gangadharappa et al., 2003; Tebkew and Atinkut, 2022). Additionally, research is needed on the policy and governance frameworks that support the integration of SFM and agroforestry. While some stud- ies have examined the role of policy and governance in sustainable land use, further exploration is necessary to design and implement effective frameworks that facilitate this integration (Tebkew and Atinkut, 2022). Although previous research has highlighted the impor- tance of SFM and agroforestry for maintaining ecologi- cal balance and promoting environmental sustainabil- ity, gaps remain in understanding their integrated ap- proach, particularly concerning ecological, social, and economic dimensions. This research aims to fill these gaps by offering new insights through a comprehensive review of how SFM and agroforestry practices can be integrated for enhanced environmental sustainability. Agroforestry plays a crucial role in sustainable development, especially with the global population projected to reach 9.4-10.1 billion by 2050 (United Nations, n.d.). To meet this demand, agricultural pro- duction needs to increase by 25% to 70% by 2050, depending on future economic growth and dietary changes (Giller et al., 2021; Galanakis, 2024). Agro- forestry principles and practices are key to enabling the global agri-food sector to adopt more sustainable methods of food and fiber production, providing eco- nomic benefits for farmers and environmental benefits for society. Agroforestry offers numerous provisioning, regulating, cultural, and supporting ecosystem services while promoting eco-intensification based on more ef- ficient resource use (Pantera et al., 2021). Addressing these challenges requires sustainable practices such as agroecology, which integrates mixed cropping, agro- forestry, and crop-livestock systems (Akanmu et al., 2023). Furthermore, research into sustainable forest and agroforestry management is essential to mitigate environmental damage caused by unsustainable prac- tices. This research aims to develop effective strategies that enhance environmental sustainability through im- proved forest and agroforestry management practices. In this study, the researcher explores several key questions: What are the key comprehensive approaches to sustainable forest management? How can commu- nity forestry promote sustainable development? How resilient are agroforestry practices in achieving sustain- able agricultural outcomes? Additionally, how do insti- tutions, decision-making processes, and fiscal policies influence the success of sustainable forest management and agroforestry practices? This study aims to provide new insights into the integration of sustainable forest management and agroforestry for enhancing environ- mental sustainability. It seeks to advance practices that support both forestry and agriculture, and to offer valu- able information for policy and decision-making, ad- dressing pressing environmental and social challenges. 2 METHODS 2 METODE This study used a systematic review to synthesize existing knowledge on a particular topic by evaluating findings from previous studies (Mengist et al., 2020). A thematic analysis approach was used to identify key themes and patterns in the data. The keywords used to search the literature included agroforestry, sustainable agriculture, sustainable forestry, community engage- ment, and rural development. The steps in this system- atic review are shown in the PRISMA diagram in Fig. 1. Inclusion criteria for selecting documents included relevance to the topic of agroforestry, publication in peer-reviewed journals or reputable organizations, open access, and availability of full-text articles. The search was conducted using Publish or Perish version 8 software (Harzing, 2016) with the Crossref online da- tabase, initially yielding 1000 articles (Haddaway et al., 2015). Articles were filtered to remove those that did not meet the criteria, such as non-peer-reviewed sourc- es or articles lacking full text. This process resulted in 305 relevant journal articles. These 305 articles were then further refined by removing duplicates and articles focused on corrections or updates, leaving 281 articles. These were categorized based on Scopus quartiles: Q1 (77 articles), Q2 (61 articles), Q3 (25 articles), Q4 (2 ar- ticles), and not indexed by Scopus (116 articles). Of the 165 Scopus Q1-Q4 indexed articles, 48 were selected based on their relevance to the study topic. This selec- Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 15 tion was done by reviewing the abstracts and introduc- tions to determine relevance. The 48 articles meeting the inclusion criteria were then analyzed in detail. The data analysis process included coding and cat- egorizing the data using thematic analysis (Naeem et al., 2023). Codes and categories were developed based on research questions and objectives. The analysis in- volved identifying key themes and patterns in the data, as well as synthesizing findings from previous studies. Data validity was ensured through a systematic and transparent approach to data search, selection, and analysis. The study also utilized a peer review process to ensure the quality and validity of the findings. The review results are presented according to the categorized topics and themes identified during the analysis. Each theme is discussed in detail, highlighting the key issues and patterns that emerged from the data. The results are organized to reflect the various catego- ries, providing a clear and structured overview of the findings. For each category, specific examples and in- sights from the data are used to illustrate the broader trends and implications. This structured presentation helps in understanding how different aspects of the re- search questions are addressed and how the findings contribute to the study’s overall objectives. 3 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3 REZULTATI IN RAZPRAVA This section outlines the synthesis of literature on sustainable forest management and agroforestry. The first part reviews Comprehensive Approaches to Sustain- able Forest Management, introducing broad strategies and frameworks for sustainable management. The sec- ond part, Community Forestry and Sustainable Develop- ment: Insights and Opportunities, narrows the focus to community-level efforts, illustrating how broad strate- gies are applied and their impact on sustainable devel- opment. The third part, Agroforestry: A Sustainable and Resilient Agricultural Practice, discusses agroforestry as a specific practice within sustainable management, showcasing methods to achieve sustainability and re- silience in agriculture. The final part, The Role of Insti- tutions, Decision-Making, and Fiscal Policies in Sustain- able Forest Management and Agroforestry, addresses Fig. 1: PRISMA approach diagram of the study Slika 1: Diagram raziskave po pristopu PRISMA 16 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... the institutional and policy frameworks necessary to support the discussed strategies and practices, cover- ing how governance, decision-making processes, and fiscal policies influence implementation and success. 3.1 Comprehensive approaches to sustainable forest management 3.1 Celostni pristopi k trajnostnemu upravljanju gozdov Sustainable forest management is important for the health and resilience of forest ecosystems, as well as human well-being and economic development. A study by Keleş (2019) assessed the hydrological functions of forest ecosystems and emphasized the importance of considering the water cycle in forest management decisions (Keleş, 2019:12). Similarly, Ofoegbu and If- ejika Speranza (2017) examined the intentions of rural people to adopt sustainable forest use and manage- ment practices in South Africa, highlighting the need for community-led initiatives and education (Ofoegbu and Chirwa, 2019:25). These studies show the signifi- cance of considering social and ecological aspects in forest management to achieve sustainability. Resilience is crucial for sustainable forest man- agement. Fuller and Quine (2016) explain that the complexity of resilience in forest systems cannot be captured by a single definition. A more effective ap- proach is to analyze four key components: resistance, recovery, transformation, and adaptation. A study by Chia et al. (2020) using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to assess barriers to adopting sustainable forest management practices in Cameroon identified lack of funding and inadequate institutional capacity as major obstacles (Chia et al., 2020:32). This research under- scores the need for a comprehensive approach to forest management that considers the complex relationships between trees, ecosystems, and human communities. Delić et al. (2017), in their value chain analysis of non- wood forest products in Bosnia and Herzegovina, re- vealed the potential for sustainable development of forest resources and rural areas (Delić et al., 2017:28), while Edame et al. (2014) highlighted the importance of managing agriculture, forestry, and water resources for sustainable development in Nigeria, emphasizing integrated approaches to natural resource manage- ment (Edame et al., 2014:35). Collectively, these stud- ies demonstrate that considering the economic and social benefits of forest management is essential for achieving sustainable development.Best Management Practices (BMPs) in forestry have been implemented in various regions to reduce environmental impacts. A literature review by Cristan et al. (2016) indicates that BMPs are effective, although their implementation and enforcement vary widely across the United States (Cristan et al., 2016:12). Understanding stakeholder perceptions is crucial for the successful adoption of BMPs. For instance, a study by Tumpach et al. (2018) in Georgia revealed differing perceptions between land- owners and forest managers, with the latter group be- ing more positive about BMP effectiveness compared to environmental groups and the general public, who were more skeptical (Tumpach et al., 2018:25). To promote sustainable forestry practices, the Sustain- able Forestry Initiative (SFI) has been implemented in several regions. A study by Karnatz et al. (2023) in the southeastern United States showed that SFI certifica- tion can positively impact BMPs and biodiversity con- servation, although its effectiveness varies depending on the region and type of certification (Karnatz et al., 2023:37). Regional variations in rules and BMPs also lead to inconsistencies and inefficiencies in forestry practices, as found in a study by Pendly et al. (2015) in New Zealand, which recommended a more coordi- nated approach to forestry policies and regulations to address these issues (Pendly et al., 2015:50). Reduction of Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD+) has been implemented in various countries to promote sustainable forest management and reduce greenhouse gas emissions. However, research by Poudel (2014) in Nepal indi- cates that REDD+ projects often prioritize carbon se- questration over local development needs, leading to conflicts with local communities (Poudel, 2014:62). Another study by Bastakoti and Davidsen (2014) in Nepal reveals that REDD+ projects can undermine for- est tenure security, especially for indigenous and lo- cal communities (Bastakoti and Davidsen, 2014:75). Conversely, research by Bayrak and Marafa (2020) in Central Vietnam found that Vietnamese farmers have a positive perception of sustainable forest manage- ment and REDD+, although they lack the knowledge and resources to implement these practices (Bayrak and Marafa, 2020:90). Additionally, forest concession management has become a concern in several coun- tries. A study by Bulkan (2014) in Guyana shows that forest concessions can lead to the displacement of in- digenous communities and forest degradation (Bul- kan, 2014:105). Community-based forest management programs implemented in several countries, as stud- ied by Chinangwa et al. (2017) in Malawi, have shown positive impacts on forest conditions, though their ef- fectiveness depends on community engagement levels and resource availability (Chinangwa et al., 2017:120). In conclusion, achieving sustainable forest manage- Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 17 ment requires a multifaceted approach that integrates ecological, social, and economic considerations. Stud- ies highlight the crucial role of maintaining forest re- silience by addressing components such as resistance and adaptation, while also emphasizing the importance of community involvement and education in adopting sustainable practices. Effective forest management requires robust value chain analyses and BMPs, as well as a coordinated approach to policy and regional variations. Although initiatives like REDD+ and forest co-management programs offer promising avenues for reducing emissions and improving community en- gagement, their success often hinges on balancing en- vironmental goals with local development needs and securing forest tenure. A comprehensive strategy that considers these factors is essential for promoting both ecological health and human well-being. 3.2 Community forestry and sustainable develo- pment: insights and opportunities 3.2 Skupnostno gozdarstvo in trajnostni razvoj: uvidi in priložnosti Community forestry plays a crucial role in achiev- ing sustainable development goals by increasing household income and promoting sustainable forestry practices in rural areas. Research in Bhutan indicates that community forestry supports sustainable devel- opment (Moktan et al., 2016), while studies in Nepal highlight the importance of institutional interactions within the community forestry framework (Aryal et al., 2020). These findings illustrate the potential of com- munity forestry to enhance rural livelihoods. However, community forest management is influenced by vari- ous factors, including social and economic contexts. For example, in Kenya, Musyoki et al. (2016) identified factors affecting the participation of community forest associations in forest management, while in Thailand, Apipoonyanon et al. (2020) explored factors influenc- ing household participation. The importance of under- standing these contexts is critical. Additionally, social inequality can significantly impact community forest- ry. Research by Race and Sumirat (2015) in Indonesia and Assuah et al. (2016) on the Wetzin’kwa Commu- nity Forest Corporation in Canada highlights the need to address social inequality to promote fairer and more sustainable forest management practices. Community forest management faces significant challenges, particularly from urban growth and land acquisition. Bridhikitti and Khadka (2020) analyzed factors influencing the success of small-scale commu- nity forest management in Thailand amid urban ex- pansion, while Carig and Carig (2022) explored the im- pacts of migration and land acquisition on community- based forest management projects in the Philippines. Both studies highlight the importance of addressing these challenges to support the sustainability of com- munity forest management. Active community par- ticipation is crucial for achieving these goals. Paudel and Sah (2015) recommend enhancing participation through techniques that maximize forest recovery and sustainable ecosystem services. Vianna and Fearnside (2014) assessed the impact of community forest man- agement on biomass carbon stocks in Brazil. Together, these studies underscore the essential role of commu- nity involvement in promoting sustainable forest man- agement. Industrial tree plantations significantly impact community forestry, making it crucial to consider their perspectives and effects. Byakagaba and Muhi- irwe (2017) explored the views of local communities near industrial tree plantations in Uganda, while Nath and Magendran (2021) assessed the management and public use of urban community forests in Malaysia. Both studies emphasize the importance of understand- ing how industrial tree plantations affect community forestry. Community-based conservation can provide substantial benefits for forest ecosystem services and household income. Communally managed indigenous forests offer valuable insights into sustainable for- est management practices. For instance, Lambini and Nguyen (2022) examined the impact of community- based conservation associations on forest ecosystem services and household income in Kenya, while Mun- yati and Sinthumule (2014) investigated forest-com- munity boundaries in South Africa. These studies high- light the advantages of community-based conservation and communal management in promoting sustainable forest management and enhancing livelihoods in indig- enous communities. In conclusion, community forestry plays a vital role in achieving sustainable development goals by promot- ing household income and sustainable forestry prac- tices, thereby improving livelihoods. Research from Bhutan, Nepal, Kenya, and Thailand demonstrates the positive impacts of community forestry on rural live- lihoods, influenced by factors such as social and eco- nomic context. However, challenges such as social in- equalities, urban growth, and land acquisition must be addressed to ensure equitable and sustainable man- agement. Studies from various regions underscore the importance of community participation, institutional support, and considering the impact of industrial plan- tations in promoting effective forest conservation and sustainable ecosystem services. 18 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... 3.3 Agroforestry: a sustainable and resilient agricultural practice 3.3 Kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi: trajnostna in odporna kmetijska praksa Agroforestry is a promising approach to sustainable agriculture and rural development, relying on factors such as market access, farmer behavior, and traditional knowledge. This integrated land use approach contrib- utes to sustainable agriculture, reduces environmental degradation, and improves livelihoods. To maximize its benefits, policies and programs should promote agro- forestry practices. By integrating trees into agricul- tural landscapes, agroforestry enhances food security and reduces environmental harm (Wilson and Lovell, 2016). This practice fosters biodiversity processes that can increase yields and mitigate negative impacts. For example, in southern Ethiopia, the conversion of Acacia woodland to managed pastureland, parkland agrofor- estry, and treeless cropland has shown significant ef- fects on soil carbon stock, total nitrogen, and various soil properties (Gurmessa et al., 2016). Specifically, parkland agroforestry systems exhibit higher soil car- bon stock and total nitrogen levels compared to both treeless cropland and managed pastureland, under- scoring the critical role of agroforestry in promoting food security while minimizing environmental damage. In Tigray, Ethiopia, parkland agroforestry meets the demand for firewood, reducing pressure on natural for- ests, enhancing energy security, improving livelihoods, and lowering poverty in local communities (Tadele et al., 2020). Traditional agroforestry practices in Wonchi District, Ethiopia, are influenced by land use and land cover dynamics, which are crucial for developing sus- tainable land use practices (Meragiaw et al., 2022). In Ghana, the economic outcomes of cocoa agroforestry are affected by shade levels, farm size, and farmer ex- perience; farmers using higher shade levels achieve greater yields and incomes compared to those with lower shade levels (Owusu et al., 2022). Additionally, in Kwale and Kilifi, Kenya, the choice of market outlets by agroforestry-based mango producers is influenced by farm size, education level, and access to credit, with producers implementing agroforestry practices being more likely to choose formal market outlets, improving their market access and prices (Mwembe et al., 2021). Agroforestry practices significantly impact agricul- tural income and rural development. In rural Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan, a study found that farmers who adopted agroforestry experienced increased ag- ricultural income and were more likely to reinvest in their operations (Saqib and Khan, 2022). Behavioral factors such as attitudes, perceptions, and social norms play a crucial role in the adoption of these practices (Goltz et al., 2020; Leduc and Hansson, 2024). Under- standing these factors is essential for promoting agro- forestry adoption and enhancing agricultural income. Additionally, agroforestry provides ecological advan- tages. Research on hybrid aspen ‘Crandon’ in central Iowa, USA, revealed that tree spacing and soil type sig- nificantly influence coarse root biomass and root ar- chitecture. Systems with wider tree spacing exhibited greater coarse root biomass and more extensive root structures (Headlee et al., 2019). Agroforestry practices offer considerable benefits for sustainable agriculture, rural development, and en- vironmental conservation. They enhance soil health, biodiversity, and ecosystem services while boosting crop yields and farm income. The success of agrofor- estry depends on several factors, including market ac- cess, farmer behavior, traditional knowledge, and insti- tutional support. Policies and programs should address these factors to promote the widespread adoption of agroforestry. Furthermore, agroforestry helps reduce pressure on natural forests, promotes energy security, and mitigates climate change. The evidence supports agroforestry as a promising approach for achieving sustainable agriculture and rural development, and its adoption should be encouraged and supported through targeted policies and institutional programs. 3.4 The role of institutions, decision-making, and fiscal policies in sustainable forest ma- nagement and agroforestry 3.4 Vloga institucij, odločanja in fiskalnih po- litik pri trajnostnem upravljanju gozdov in kmetijsko-gozdarskih sistemov Sustainable forest management (SFM) is crucial for addressing deforestation and preserving forest resourc- es. Institutions play a vital role in implementing effec- tive SFM practices through policies, laws, and economic incentives (Kant and Berry, 2005). The failure of certain economic policies and forest institutions has contribut- ed to deforestation, necessitating sound pricing policies and strong enforcement mechanisms (D`Silva and Ap- panah, 1993). Benefit-sharing schemes and local com- munity involvement are essential for successful SFM implementation (D`Silva and Appanah, 1993; Sarfo- Adu, 2021). The concept of SFM gained prominence after the 1992 Rio Conference, leading to increased at- tention to forest-related policies and laws (Sarfo-Adu, 2021). Market-based approaches, such as trading en- vironmental services and carbon sinks, offer potential solutions for SFM (D`Silva and Appanah, 1993; Kant and Berry, 2005). However, challenges remain in developing Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 19 optimal institutions for SFM, balancing property rights, and addressing the limitations of sustainable forestry in a globalized economy (Kant and Berry, 2005). Strong institutions, including markets, are crucial for sustainable forest management. Improved gover- nance may reduce deforestation indirectly, but direct reforms in the forestry sector are more effective (Kishor and Belle, 2004; Kant and Berry, 2005; Broekhoven et al., 2012). A unified forestry organization is recom- mended, along with support from forestry associations for private and community-managed forests (Fraser, 2019). Various policy instruments, such as regulatory, financial, and technical measures, can support sustain- able forest management (Fraser, 2019). Countries that gained forest area employed approximately twice as many people in forestry compared to those that lost for- est, indicating a need for increased staffing to achieve sustainable forest management globally (Fraser, 2019). Fiscal subsidy policies play a crucial role in promot- ing sustainable forest management and agricultural practices. A study by Qin et al. (2015) in China found that forestry fiscal subsidy policies are more effective than agricultural subsidies in encouraging sustainable practices, although both face limitations and challeng- es (Qin et al., 2015:135). This highlights the need for further research on the effectiveness of forestry Best Management Practices (BMPs), REDD+, and fiscal sub- sidy policies while also addressing regional variations and the issue of forest grabbing. While fiscal policies are essential for promoting sustainable forest man- agement, their effectiveness can vary significantly. In Nepal, inconsistencies in fiscal instruments for com- munity forestry have hindered sustainable and mar- ket-oriented forest management (Paudel and Weiss, 2011; Paudel and Weiss, 2013). Taxation can similarly undermine sustainability in tropical forests, leading to proposals for alternative mechanisms, such as a bond system (Leruth et al., 2001). In China, forestry fiscal subsidies lag behind agricultural subsidies, limiting support for forest workers despite their vital contri- butions to wood supply and ecological security (Qin et al., 2015). To address these challenges, policymak- ers should consider revising fiscal policies to ensure consistency, expanding the categories of forestry sub- sidies, and improving standards (Qin et al., 2015). Ad- ditionally, involving stakeholders in policy formulation and enhancing coordination among government units, community forest user groups, and non-governmental organizations could effectively tackle practical issues in community forestry (Paudel and Weiss, 2013). Understanding farmer behavior and decision- making processes is critical for promoting sustainable forest management. Feola et al. (2015) found that de- cision-making models, cross-scale pressures, and tem- poral dynamics are essential for understanding farmer behavior, which can guide future interdisciplinary studies (Feola et al., 2015:18). Hitchner et al. (2023) emphasized the need for culturally sensitive approach- es based on case studies of black forest landowners in Georgia, United States (Hitchner et al., 2023:22). Simi- larly, Papaioannou et al. (2019) compared forest man- agement practices in chestnut forests of Greece, stress- ing the importance of ecosystem health in decision- making (Papaioannou et al., 2019:30). These studies demonstrate the significance of considering the social and ecological aspects of forest management to pro- mote sustainable practices. Key factors such as economic characteristics, risk perceptions, and demographic aspects like age and education significantly influence decisions regard- ing forest management (Li et al., 2004; Thoai and Ra- nola, 2010; Nastis et al., 2019). Agent-based modeling reveals that knowledge of forest policies, laws, and regulations, as well as labor availability, significantly influence farmers’ decisions on woodlot establishment (Ahimbisibwe et al., 2021). To promote sustainable forest management, it is essential to improve farm- ers’ awareness of benefits, modify existing policies to ensure adequate compensation, and address miscon- ceptions about land tenure rights (Li et al., 2004; Thoai and Ranola, 2010; Ahimbisibwe et al., 2021). The com- plexity of forest management decisions has increased, necessitating adaptive approaches and improved de- cision support tools (Lawrence and Stewart, 2011). Adaptive management is considered a key social eco- system process for long-term sustainability, empha- sizing the importance of learning and learning-based planning (Bormann et al., 2017). Decision-making frameworks can help address en- vironmental challenges by considering cultural context, Institutional challenges pose a significant obstacle to sustainable forest management. Girma and Beyene (2015) examined these challenges in the Gambella Re- gional State of Western Ethiopia, highlighting the need for stronger institutional capacity and coordination among stakeholders (Girma and Beyene, 2015:20). Similarly, Malatinec et al. (2016) evaluated the convergence of Slovak state administration with EU requirements for sustainable agriculture, land use, forestry, and natural resource management, identifying areas for improvement (Malatinec et al., 2016:40). These studies demonstrate the importance of strong institutions and governance structures in supporting sustainable forest management. 20 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... planning activities, decision-making modes, and deci- sion actions (Tonn et al., 2000). The science of decision- making offers valuable concepts and tools for resource managers to address risks, stressors, and challenges in sustainable forest management (Thompson et al., 2022). However, there is a need for better integration of social and institutional processes in the development and use of decision support tools, as well as a focus on fostering sustainable environmental and social systems while meeting obligations to future generations (Tonn et al., 2000; Lawrence and Stewart, 2011). In conclusion, sustainable forest management (SFM) requires a multifaceted approach, with institu- tions, policies, and community involvement playing vi- tal roles in its success. Strong institutions and effective governance are essential for addressing deforestation and promoting sustainable practices, as shown by the importance of economic incentives, fiscal subsidies, and benefit-sharing schemes. Additionally, under- standing farmer behavior and incorporating culturally sensitive approaches are key to fostering sustainable management at the local level. Adaptive management and decision-making frameworks can support long- term sustainability by integrating social, ecological, and institutional dynamics. However, challenges re- main in refining fiscal policies, improving decision support tools, and ensuring stakeholder coordination to meet the demands of sustainable forest manage- ment in a globalized context. Agroforestry systems have significant potential to enhance economic and environmental sustainability, yet their adoption is shaped by various socioeconom- ic, institutional, and policy factors (Alavalapati et al., 2001). Decision-making in agroforestry is complex due to its long-term nature, requiring collaboration from multidisciplinary teams (Wood, 1988). Property rights and collective action are critical in defining responsibil- ities related to tree management, impacting associated externalities (Place et al., 2004). Government policies play a pivotal role in encouraging the widespread adop- tion of agroforestry, especially when they create mar- ket opportunities and economic incentives (Ajayi and Place, 2012). However, despite the growing integration of agroforestry into national development programs, some policies still pose challenges. To ensure sustained adoption, it is essential to complement agroforestry dissemination with favorable policy, institutional, and economic incentives (Ajayi and Place, 2012). Strong institutions and governance structures are fundamental to the effective implementation of agro- forestry systems. Institutional backing is critical in de- signing policies for land rehabilitation that yield eco- nomic and ecological benefits (Nuddin et al., 2019). Governance challenges such as coordinating polycen- tricity, addressing power imbalances, and integrating various types of knowledge must be overcome to op- timize agroforestry adoption (Katic, 2021). Emerging governance patterns create both opportunities and constraints, with key issues revolving around land and tree tenure, forest classification, and environmental service rewards (Swallow et al., 2006). In Melanesian contexts, informal institutions like women’s groups and traditional land tenure systems play vital roles in bal- ancing individual entrepreneurship with community development, thus supporting agroforestry (Addinsall et al., 2016). A comprehensive governance framework is needed to incorporate agroforestry into climate change adaptation and mitigation strategies (Katic, 2021). Fiscal subsidy policies are crucial in promoting agroforestry. Financial support, such as the European Union’s Common Agricultural Policy, positively im- pacts farmer income and woodland expansion (Galluz- zo, 2015). In regions like Africa and Asia, government policies have facilitated agroforestry by creating mar- ket opportunities and offering economic incentives for adoption (Ajayi and Place, 2012). In China, agricul- tural subsidies have boosted production and incomes, though forestry subsidies lag behind, highlighting the need for balanced support (Qin et al., 2015). Agrofor- estry also contributes to climate change adaptation, in- creasing tree cover, enhancing carbon stocks, and con- serving biodiversity (Zoysa and Inoue, 2014). Ensur- ing sustained adoption requires regulatory changes, awareness development, and climate-smart landscape planning (Zoysa and Inoue, 2014). Thus, integrating agroforestry into national programs with supportive policies and incentives is essential for broader adop- tion (Ajayi and Place, 2012). Understanding farmer behavior is key to promot- ing agroforestry adoption. Research has identified factors influencing farmers’ decisions, including eco- nomic considerations, environmental benefits, and social norms (Tanveer Hussain et al., 2012; Fleming et al., 2019). Farmers often perceive the advantages of agroforestry, such as increased income and pollution control, to outweigh potential disadvantages like ag- ricultural interference (Tanveer Hussain et al., 2012). Socioeconomic variables such as family size, land ownership, and income positively impact adoption, while age negatively influences it (Ahmad et al., 2023). Membership in networks enhances adoption through knowledge sharing and technical support (Leduc and Hansson, 2024). Although psychological factors from Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 21 the Theory of Planned Behavior show some influence, their effect remains inconclusive (Leduc and Hansson, 2024). To enhance adoption rates, policies should fo- cus on expanding agricultural extension services and farmer training programs (Ahmad et al., 2023). Decision-making processes play a pivotal role in agroforestry adoption, particularly for smallholder farmers. Factors influencing adoption include extrinsic variables, such as farmer characteristics and external environments, and intrinsic ones like knowledge, atti- tudes, and perceptions (Meijer et al., 2015). Due to the longer time scales involved in agroforestry compared to traditional agriculture, decision-making is more challenging (Wood, 1988). Economic considerations, such as soil fertility management and natural capital, significantly influence farmers’ decisions (Izac, 2002). While various approaches to understanding decision- making have been compared, the Theory of Planned Behavior has shown the highest accuracy in predicting adoption rates, unlike other models that may overes- timate adoption (Noeldeke et al., 2022). A multidisci- plinary approach, along with the formation of interdis- ciplinary committees, may expedite decision-making in agroforestry research and development (Wood, 1988). In conclusion, agroforestry systems have significant potential for enhancing economic and environmental sustainability, but their widespread adoption depends on various factors. Strong institutional support, favor- able policies, and clear property rights are essential for promoting agroforestry, while governance challenges such as power imbalances and tenure issues must be addressed. Fiscal subsidies and market incentives enhance adoption, particularly when integrated into national development programs. Additionally, farmer decision-making, influenced by economic, social, and psychological factors, plays a crucial role, highlight- ing the need for comprehensive agricultural extension services and multidisciplinary approaches to optimize agroforestry adoption. 4 CONCLUSION 4 ZAKLJUČKI Sustainable forest management (SFM) is crucial for maintaining forest ecosystems, enhancing human well- being, and fostering economic development. A holistic approach that integrates tree, ecosystem, and commu- nity interactions is essential. Effective SFM requires strong governance and institutions, as well as inte- grating value chain analysis to balance environmental, social, and economic outcomes. Understanding farm- ers’ behavior and decision-making is key to promoting SFM. Community forestry and agroforestry provide pathways for both environmental protection and live- lihood improvement. Engaging stakeholders—such as farmers, policymakers, and landowners—in decision- making ensures their interests align with sustainabil- ity goals (Latip et al., 2013; Poudyal et al., 2020). Rais- ing awareness about the long-term benefits of SFM, including improved market opportunities, reduced production costs, and enhanced ecosystem resilience, fosters trust and adoption (Glover et al., 2013; Fatima et al., 2024). Demonstrating successful examples, like agroforestry, increases stakeholder confidence. A resilience-based approach to SFM is essential, focusing on climate change mitigation, enhancing in- stitutional capacity, and stakeholder coordination. Community-led initiatives and education programs can promote sustainable management practices. Key policy recommendations include: (1) supporting agro- forestry through fiscal incentives, technical assistance, and financial access; (2) capacity building for farmers and forest managers in sustainable techniques; (3) strengthening governance to protect community rights and secure land tenure; (4) developing sustainable val- ue chains for forest products; and (5) ongoing research on best practices, including agroforestry and REDD+, tailored to local conditions. By adopting these strate- gies, policymakers can promote sustainable forest use, enhance livelihoods, and protect ecosystems. Further research is needed on the long-term impact of agrofor- estry and REDD+, as well as financial mechanisms to scale up successful practices. 5 SUMMARY Agroforestry, which integrates trees with crops or livestock, presents a promising method for sustain- able agriculture and forestry by addressing ecological, economic, and social challenges such as biodiversity, climate change adaptation, and rural development. To develop effective agroforestry practices, it is essential to synthesize existing knowledge to identify key suc- cess factors and best practices tailored to different contexts while overcoming challenges such as incor- porating traditional knowledge, improving market access for agroforestry products, and scaling up suc- cessful systems. Despite the benefits of sustainable forest management (SFM) and agroforestry, there is a critical need for more research on integrating these approaches to enhance environmental sustainability. The social and economic implications of agroforestry, alongside the policy and governance frameworks that support SFM, remain underexplored. Research should focus on designing and implementing frameworks that facilitate this integration, addressing the ecological, so- 22 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... cial, and economic dimensions of both practices. As the global population grows and food demand rises, agro- forestry offers a sustainable alternative to monocul- ture, enhancing resource use efficiency and providing vital ecosystem services. This study employs systemat- ic review and thematic analysis to identify key themes and patterns in agroforestry and SFM research, aiming to provide insights for policy and decision-making to tackle environmental challenges. Sustainable forest management (SFM) is essential for ecosystems and human well-being, requiring an approach that integrates hydrological functions and emphasizes community involvement and education. Research highlights the importance of resilience by un- derstanding resistance, recovery, transformation, and adaptation to enhance management strategies. Effec- tive practices must overcome barriers such as funding and institutional capacity. Best Management Practices (BMPs) can reduce environmental impacts, but their success varies regionally, necessitating better stake- holder engagement. Programs like REDD+ aim to pro- mote sustainable management but often struggle with local development needs and community tenure se- curity. Community forestry plays a critical role in sus- tainable development by improving rural livelihoods, but it also faces challenges from social inequalities and urban growth. Agroforestry offers a promising path for sustainable agriculture, enhancing food security while reducing environmental degradation. Its successful adoption re- lies on market access, traditional knowledge, and sup- portive policies. Achieving sustainable management requires integrating ecological, social, and economic dimensions, with active community participation be- ing vital for effective practices. Strong institutions that enforce policies and economic incentives are crucial, as inadequate frameworks have worsened deforesta- tion and highlighted the need for better pricing and en- forcement mechanisms. Since the increased focus on forestry policies after the 1992 Rio Conference, local community involvement and benefit-sharing schemes have become essential, along with market-based ap- proaches that trade environmental services. However, challenges persist in establishing effective institutions that balance property rights and support sustainable forestry in a globalized economy. Institutional challenges significantly hinder sustain- able forest management (SFM), with studies highlight- ing the need for stronger governance and stakeholder coordination. While improved governance can reduce deforestation, direct reforms in the forestry sector have a more substantial impact. Establishing a unified forest- ry organization, supported by associations for private and community-managed forests, is recommended to enhance efficacy. Various policy instruments—regula- tory, financial, and technical—can bolster SFM, with evi- dence suggesting that nations that successfully increase their forest area also employ more forestry workers, indicating a need for greater staffing in this sector. Fis- cal policies play a crucial role in promoting sustainable practices, with research demonstrating that forestry fis- cal subsidies are often more effective than agricultural subsidies; however, inconsistencies in these policies can impede sustainable management. Engaging stake- holders in policy development and improving coordi- nation among government and community groups are essential for addressing practical issues in community forestry. Additionally, understanding farmer behavior and decision-making processes is vital for advancing agroforestry and SFM. Key influencing factors include economic characteristics, risk perceptions, and demo- graphic elements, all of which shape decision-making. Ultimately, both SFM and agroforestry require integrat- ed approaches that consider institutional, ecological, and social dynamics, alongside adaptive management strategies for long-term sustainability. 6 POVZETEK Kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi, ki združujejo drevesa s poljščinami ali živino, so obetaven način za trajno- stno kmetijstvo in gozdarstvo, saj obravnavajo eko- loške, gospodarske in družbene izzive, kot so biotska raznovrstnost, prilagajanje podnebnim spremembam in razvoj podeželja. Za razvoj učinkovitih praks kme- tijsko-gozdarskih sistemov je treba povzeti obstoječe znanje in opredeliti ključne dejavnike uspeha ter naj- boljše prakse, prilagojene različnim okoliščinam, hkra- ti pa premagati izzive, kot so vključevanje tradicional- nega znanja, izboljšanje dostopa do trga za kmetijsko- gozdarske proizvode in razširjanje uspešnih sistemov. Kljub koristim trajnostnega gospodarjenja z gozdovi in kmetijsko-gozdarskih sistemov je nujno potrebnih več raziskav o povezovanju teh pristopov za povečanje okoljske trajnosti. Družbene in gospodarske posledice kmetijsko-gozdarskih sistemov, skupaj z okviri politike in upravljanja, ki podpirajo trajnostno gospodarjenje z gozdovi, so še vedno premalo raziskane. Raziskave se morajo osredotočiti na oblikovanje in izvajanje okvi- rov, ki olajšujejo to povezovanje in obravnavajo ekolo- ške, družbene in gospodarske razsežnosti obeh praks. Ker svetovno prebivalstvo narašča in povpraševanje po hrani narašča, ponujajo kmetijsko-gozdarski ukre- pi trajnostno alternativo monokulturam, ki povečuje učinkovitost rabe virov in zagotavljajo pomembne eko- Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 23 sistemske storitve. Ta raziskava temelji na sistematič- nem pregledu in vsebinski analizi, s pomočjo katere so opredeljene ključne teme in vzorci v raziskavah na po- dročju kmetijsko-gozdarskih sistemov in trajnostnega upravljanja gozdov, da bi zagotovila vpogled v politiko in sprejemanje odločitev za reševanje okoljskih izzivov. Trajnostno upravljanje gozdov je bistvenega po- mena za ekosisteme in blaginjo ljudi, zato je potreben pristop, ki vključuje hidrološke funkcije ter poudarja vključevanje in izobraževanje skupnosti. Raziskave po- udarjajo pomen odpornosti z razumevanjem odporno- sti, okrevanja, preobrazbe in prilagajanja za izboljšanje strategij gospodarjenja. Učinkovite prakse morajo pre- magati ovire, kot sta financiranje in institucionalna ka- paciteta. Najboljše prakse upravljanja lahko zmanjšajo vplive na okolje, vendar se njihov uspeh regionalno razlikuje, zato je potrebno boljše sodelovanje deležni- kov. Cilj programov, kot je REDD+, je spodbujati traj- nostno upravljanje, vendar se pogosto spopadajo s po- trebami lokalnega razvoja in zagotavljanja lastniških pravic skupnosti. Gozdarstvo v skupnosti ima ključno vlogo pri trajnostnem razvoju, saj izboljšuje preživetje na podeželju, vendar se sooča tudi z izzivi zaradi soci- alne neenakosti in rasti urbanih območij. Kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi so obetavna pot za trajnostno kmetijstvo, ki povečuje prehransko varnost in hkrati zmanjšuje degradacijo okolja. Njihova uspe- šna uvedba je odvisna od dostopa do trga, tradicional- nega znanja in podpornih politik. Za doseganje trajno- stnega upravljanja je treba vključiti ekološke, družbe- ne in ekonomske razsežnosti, pri čemer je za učinko- vito prakso bistvenega pomena dejavno sodelovanje skupnosti. Močne institucije, ki uveljavljajo politike in ekonomske spodbude, so ključnega pomena, saj so neustrezni okviri okrepili krčenje gozdov in poudarili potrebo po boljših mehanizmih določanja cen in meha- nizmih izvrševanja. Odkar se je po konferenci v Riu leta 1992 gozdarskim politikam posvetila več pozornosti, so postali ključni – vključevanje lokalnih skupnosti in sistemi delitve koristi ter tržni pristopi, ki omogočajo trgovanje z okoljskimi storitvami. Vendar pa še vedno ostajajo izzivi pri vzpostavljanju učinkovitih institucij, ki uravnotežijo lastninske pravice in podpirajo trajno- stno gozdarstvo v globaliziranem gospodarstvu. Institucionalni izzivi močno ovirajo trajnostno go- spodarjenje z gozdovi, študije pa poudarjajo potrebo po močnejšem upravljanju in usklajevanju interesnih sku- pin. Z boljšim upravljanjem se lahko zavre krčenje goz- dov, vendar imajo neposredne reforme v gozdarskem sektorju večji učinek. Za povečanje učinkovitosti je pri- poročljiva ustanovitev enotne gozdarske organizacije, ki jo podpirajo združenja za zasebne gozdove in gozdove v upravljanju skupnosti. Različni instrumenti politike - regulativni, finančni in tehnični - lahko okrepijo trajno- stno gospodarjenje z gozdovi, pri čemer dokazi kažejo, da države, ki uspešno povečujejo gozdne površine, za- poslujejo tudi več gozdarskih delavcev, kar kaže na po- trebo po večjem številu osebja v tem sektorju. Fiskalne politike imajo ključno vlogo pri spodbujanju trajnostnih praks, saj raziskave kažejo, da so davčne spodbude za gozdarstvo pogosto učinkovitejše od kmetijskih pod- por; vendar lahko nedoslednosti v teh politikah ovirajo trajnostno gospodarjenje. Vključevanje zainteresiranih strani v razvoj politik ter izboljšanje usklajevanja med vlado in skupinami skupnosti sta bistvena za reševanje praktičnih vprašanj v gozdarstvu. Poleg tega je razume- vanje vedenja lastnikov zemljišč in procesov odločanja bistvenega pomena za napredek kmetijsko-gozdar- skih sistemov in trajnostnega gospodarjenja z gozdovi. Ključni vplivni dejavniki vključujejo ekonomske značil- nosti, zaznavanje tveganja in demografske elemente, ki vplivajo na sprejemanje odločitev. Navsezadnje tako trajnostno upravljanje gozdov kot kmetijsko-gozdarski sistemi zahtevajo celostne pristope, ki upoštevajo insti- tucionalno, ekološko in družbeno dinamiko ter strate- gije prilagodljivega upravljanja za dolgoročno trajnost. REFERENCES VIRI Addinsall C., Glencross K., Rihai N., Kalomor L., Palmer G., Nichols D., Smith G. 2016. Enhancing agroforestry in Vanuatu: striking the balance between individual entrepreneurship and commu- nity development. Forests, Trees and Livelihoods, 25, 1: 78–96. https://doi.org/10.1080/14728028.2015.1093434 Ahimbisibwe V., Groeneveld J., Lippe M., Tumwebaze S.B., Auch E., Berger U. 2021. Understanding smallholder farmer decision making in forest land restoration using agent-based modeling. Socio-Environmental Systems Modelling, 3, 18036. https://doi. org/10.18174/sesmo.2021a18036 Ahmad S., Xu H., Ekanayake E.M.B.P. 2023. Socioeconomic determi- nants and perceptions of smallholder farmers towards agrofore- stry adoption in Northern Irrigated Plain, Pakistan. Land, 12, 4, Article 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/land12040813 Ajayi O.C., Place F. 2012. Policy support for large-scale adoption of agroforestry practices: experience from Africa and Asia. In: Nair P.K.R., Garrity D. (Eds.), Agroforestry—the future of global land use. Springer: 175-201. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007- 4676-3_12 Akanmu A.O., Akol A.M., Ndolo D.O., Kutu F.R., Babalola O.O. 2023. Agroecological techniques: doption of safe and sustainable agri- cultural practices among the smallholder farmers in Africa. Fron- tiers in Sustainable Food Systems, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/ fsufs.2023.1143061 Alavalapati J., Nair P.K.R., Barkin D. 2001. Socioeconomic and insti- tutional perspectives of Agroforestry. In: Palo M., Uusivuori, J., Mery G. (Eds.). World forests, markets and policies. Springer: 71- 83. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0664-4_5 Apipoonyanon C., Kuwornu J.K.M., Szabo S., Shrestha R.P. 2020. Fac- tors influencing household participation in community forest management: evidence from Udon Thani Province, Thailand. Jo- urnal of Sustainable Forestry, 39, 2: 184–206. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/10549811.2019.1632211 24 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... Aryal K., Laudari H.K., Ojha H.R. 2020. To what extent is Nepal’s com- munity forestry contributing to the sustainable development go- als? An institutional interaction perspective. International Jour- nal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 27, 1: 28–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2019.1627681 Assuah A., Sinclair A.J., Reed M.G. 2016. Action on sustainable fo- rest management through community forestry: the case of the Wetzin’kwa Community Forest Corporation. The Forestry Chro- nicle, 92, 2: 232–244. https://doi.org/10.5558/tfc2016-042 Bastakoti R.R., Davidsen C. 2014. REDD+ and forest tenure security: concerns in Nepal’s community forestry. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 21, 2: 168–180. https://doi.org/10.1080/13504509.2013.879542 Bayrak M.M., Marafa L.M. 2020. Are Vietnamese farmers able to com- bat global climate change? A case study on perceptions and at- titudes towards sustainable forest management and REDD+ in Central Vietnam. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39, 3: 242–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2019.1634593 Bormann B.T., Williams B.K., Minkova T. 2017. Learning to learn: the best available science of adaptive management. In: Olson, D.H., Van Horne, B.(Eds.). People, forests, and change: lessons from the Pacific Northwest. Island Press/Center for Resource Econo- mics: 102–115. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-768-1_8 Bridhikitti A., Khadka B. 2020. Assessing factors to successful mana- gement for small-scale community forest under threat of urban growth: in a case of Ban Na Kham Noi community forest, Muk- dahan, Thailand. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39, 2: 167–183. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2019.1631184 Bulkan J. 2014. Forest grabbing through forest concession practices: the Case of Guyana. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 33, 4: 407– 434. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2014.899502 Byakagaba P., Muhiirwe R. 2017. Industrial forest plantations in Uganda: local adjacent community perspectives. Journal of Su- stainable Forestry, 36, 4: 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/10 549811.2017.1310048 Carig E.T., Carig J.G. 2022. Migration, land acquisition and bundle of rights: the case of eelected community-based forest manage- ment projects in Nueva Vizcaya, Philippines. Journal of Sustain- able Forestry, 41, 3–5: 370–385. https://doi.org/10.1080/1054 9811.2021.1935276 Chia E.L., Hubert D., Enongene K., Tegegne Y.T. 2020. An AHP asses- sment of barriers in adopting sustainable forest management practices in the context of carbon emission reductions in Came- roon. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39, 4: 379–391. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2019.1673180 Chinangwa L.L., Pullin A.S., Hockley N. 2017. Impact of forest co-ma- nagement programs on forest conditions in Malawi. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 36, 4: 338–357. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10549811.2017.1307764 Cristan R., Aust W.M., Bolding M.C., Barrett S.M., Munsell J.F., Schil- ling E. 2016. Effectiveness of forestry best management practi- ces in the United States: Literature review. Forest Ecology and Management, 360: 133–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fore- co.2015.10.025 D`Silva E., Appanah S. 1993. Forestry management for sustainable development. (EDI Policy Seminar Report 32. Washington, DC, World Bank Group. Edame G.E., Effiong C.E., Ackuk E.M.-B. 2014. Agriculture, forestry and water resources management: a Panacea for sustainable development in Nigeria. Academic Journal of Interdisciplinary Studies, 3, 4: 373–373. Fatima S., Abbas S., Rebi A., Ying Z. 2024. Sustainable forestry and environmental impacts: Assessing the economic, environmen- tal, and social benefits of adopting sustainable agricultural practices. Ecological Frontiers. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eco- fro.2024.05.009 Feola G., Lerner A.M., Jain M., Montefrio M.J.F., Nicholas K.A. 2015. Researching farmer behaviour in climate change adaptation and sustainable agriculture: Lessons learned from five case studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 39: 74–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jrurstud.2015.03.009 Fleming A., O’Grady A.P., Mendham D., England J., Mitchell P., Moroni M., Lyons A. 2019. Understanding the values behind farmer per- ceptions of trees on farms to increase adoption of agroforestry in Australia. Agronomy for Sustainable Development, 39, 1, 9. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-019-0555-5 Fraser A. 2019. Institutions and policy instruments required to ensu- re forests are managed sustainably. In: Fraser A. (Ed.). Achieving the sustainable management of forests. Springer International Publishing: 47–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-15839- 2_5 Fuller L., Quine C.P. 2016. Resilience and tree health: a basis for im- plementation in sustainable forest management. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research, 89, 1: 7–19. Galanakis C.M. 2024. The future of food. Foods, 13, 4. https://doi. org/10.3390/foods13040506 Galluzzo N. 2015. Role and effect of agroforesty subsides allocated by the Common Agricultural Policy in Italian farms. Internati- onal Journal of Food and Agricultural Economics (IJFAEC), 3, 1: 19–31. https://doi.org/10.22004/ag.econ.200123 Gangadharappa N.R., Shivamurthy M., Ganesamoorthi S. 2003. Agro- forestry – a viable alternative for social, economic and ecologi- cal sustainability. In: XII World Agroforestry Congress. https:// www.fao.org/4/xii/0051-b5.htm Girma W., Beyene F. 2015. Institutional challenges in sustainable forest management: evidence from the Gambella Regional Sta- te of Western Ethiopia. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 34, 3: 233–258. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2014.1003245 Glover E.K., Ahmed H.B., Glover M.K. 2013. Analysis of socio-econo- mic conditions influencing adoption of agroforestry practices. International Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 3, 4: 178–184. https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijaf.20130304.09 Goltz S.M., Mayer A.L., Orr B. 2020. Applied behavior analysis as a development tool: examples from agroforestry. Journal of Susta- inable Forestry, 39, 8: 785–799. https://doi.org/10.1080/1054 9811.2020.1730906 Gurmessa B., Demessie A., Lemma B. 2016. Dynamics of soil carbon stock, total nitrogen, and associated soil properties since the conversion of Acacia woodland to managed pastureland, par- kland agroforestry, and treeless cropland in the Jido Komolcha District, southern Ethiopia. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 35, 5: 324–337. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2016.1175950 Haddaway N.R., Collins A.M., Coughlin D., Kirk S. 2015. The role of Google Scholar in evidence reviews and its applicability to grey literature searching. PLOS ONE, 10, 9, e0138237. https://doi. org/10.1371/journal.pone.0138237 Harzing A.-W. 2016. Publish or Perish. Harzing.Com. https://harzing. and architecture of hybrid aspen ‘Crandon’ (Populus alba L. × P. grandidenta Michx.) grown in an agroforestry system in central Iowa, USA. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 38, 1: 18–30. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2018.1491861 Hitchner S., Goyke N., Thomas M., Schelhas J., Dwived P. 2023. Beyond the math: case studies of black forest landowners in Georgia, United States. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 42, 3: 324–335. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2021.2010573 Izac A.M.N. 2002. Economic aspects of soil fertility management and agroforestry practices. In: Trees, crops and soil fertility: concepts and research methods. CABI: 13–37. https://doi. org/10.1079/9780851995939.0013 Delić S., Keča L., Ibrahimspahić A., Čabaravdić A., Behlulović D. 2017. Value chain analysis of non-wood forest products in function of sustainable development of forest resources and rural develo- pment in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Agriculture and Forestry, 63, 1: 277–290. Giller K.E., Delaune T., Silva J.V., Descheemaeker K., van de Ven G., Schut A.G.T., van Wijk M., Hammond J., Hochman Z., Taulya G., Chikowo R., Narayanan S., Kishore A., Bresciani F., Teixeira H.M., Andersson J.A., van Ittersum M.K. 2021. The future of farming: who will produce our food? Food Security, 13, 5: 1073–1099. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12571-021-01184-6 com/resources/publish-or-perish Headlee W.L., Zalesny Jr. R.S., Hall R.B. 2019. Coarse root biomass Acta Silvae et Ligni 135 (2024), 13–26 25 Kant S., Berry R.A. 2005. Sustainability, institutions, and forest ma- nagement. In: Kant S., Berry R.A. (Eds.). Institutions, sustaina- bility, and natural resources: institutions for sustainable forest management. Springer: 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020- 3519-5_1 Karnatz C., Kadam P., Hamilton H., Smyth R., Bawa R., Dwivedi P. 2023. Impacts of sustainable forestry initiative fiber sourcing on the forestry best management practices and biodiversity con- servation in the SE United States. Trees, Forests and People, 11, 100349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100349 Katic P. 2021. Climate change governance in agroforestry systems: A systematic review. Journal of the British Academy, 9, s10: 7–20. Keleş S. 2019. An assessment of hydrological functions of forest eco- systems to support sustainable forest management. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 38, 4: 305–326. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 10549811.2018.1547879 Kishor N., Belle A. 2004. Does improved governance contribute to sustainable forest management? Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 19, 1–3: 55–79. https://doi.org/10.1300/J091v19n01_04 Lambini C.K., Nguyen T.T. 2022. Impact of community based conser- vation associations on forest ecosystem services and household income: evidence from Nzoia Basin in Kenya. Journal of Sustain- able Forestry, 41, 3–5: 440–460. https://doi.org/10.1080/1054 9811.2021.1944877 Latip N.A., Badarulzaman N., Marzuki A., Umar M.U. 2013. Sustain- able forest management in Lower Kinabatangan, Sabah: issu- es and current practices. Planning Malaysia, 11. https://doi. org/10.21837/pm.v11i3.108 Lawrence A., Stewart A. 2011. Sustainable forestry decisions: on the interface between technology and participation. Mathematical and Computational Forestry and Natural-Resource Sciences, 3, 1: 42–52. Leduc G., Hansson H. 2024. Behavioural factors for farmers’ adop- tion of agroforestry practices in Sweden. Sustainable Producti- on and Consumption, 47: 178–189. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. spc.2024.03.023 Leruth L., Paris R., Ruzicka I. 2001. The complier pays princi- ple: the limits of fiscal approaches toward sustainable forest management. IMF Staff Papers, 48, 2: 397–423. https://doi. org/10.2307/4621675 Li L.Y., Chen Y. H., Liu D.D., Ying S., Li L. 2004. Farmers’ economic be- haviours and forest sustainable management. Problems of Fore- stry Economics, 24, 4: 198–220. Lintangah W.J., Atin V., Ibrahim A.L., Yahya H., Johnlee E.B., Martin R.A., John G. 2022. Sustainable forest management contribu- tion to food security: a stakeholders’ perspectives in Sabah, Malaysia. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 1053, 1, 012012. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755- 1315/1053/1/012012 Malatinec T., Marišová E., Grešová L. 2016. EU vision of sustainable agriculture, land use, forestry and management of natural reso- urces – level of the Slovak state administration convergence to the EU requirements. International Journal of Sustainable Deve- lopment and World Ecology, 23, 3: 257–265. https://doi.org/10 .1080/13504509.2015.1117994 Meijer S.S., Catacutan D., Ajayi O.C., Sileshi G.W., Nieuwenhuis M. 2015. The role of knowledge, attitudes and perceptions in the uptake of agricultural and agroforestry innovations among smallholder farmers in sub-Saharan Africa. International Jour- nal of Agricultural Sustainability, 13, 1: 40–54. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/14735903.2014.912493 Mengist W., Soromessa T., Legese G. 2020. Method for conducting systematic literature review and meta-analysis for enviro- nmental science research. MethodsX, 7, 100777. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.mex.2019.100777 Meragiaw M., Woldu Z., Singh B.R. 2022. Land use and land cover dynamics and traditional agroforestry practices in Wonchi Di- strict, Ethiopia. PeerJ, 10, e12898. https://doi.org/10.7717/ peerj.12898 Moktan M.R., Norbu L., Choden K. 2016. Can community forestry contribute to household income and sustainable forestry practi- ces in rural area? A case study from Tshapey and Zariphensum in Bhutan. Forest Policy and Economics, 62: 149–157. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.forpol.2015.08.011 Montagnini F. 2017. Introduction: challenges for agroforestry in the New Millennium. In: Montagnini F. (Ed.). Integrating landsca- pes: agroforestry for biodiversity conservation and food sove- reignty. Springer International Publishing: 3–10. https://doi. org/10.1007/978-3-319-69371-2_1 Munyati C., Sinthumule N.I. 2014. Cover gradients and the forest- community frontier: indigenous forests under communal mana- gement at Vondo and Xanthia, South Africa. Journal of Sustaina- ble Forestry, 33, 8: 757–775. https://doi.org/10.1080/1054981 1.2014.925809 Musyoki J.K., Mugwe J., Mutundu K., Muchiri M. 2016. Factors influ- encing level of participation of community forest associations in management forests in Kenya. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 35, 3: 205–216. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2016.114 2454 Mwembe A.M., Owuor G., Langat J., Mshenga P. 2021. Factors affec- ting market outlet choice of agroforestry based mango produ- cers in Kwale and Kilifi counties, Kenya: the application of the Multivariate Probit model. Cogent Food and Agriculture, 7, 1, 1936367. https://doi.org/10.1080/23311932.2021.1936367 Naeem M., Ozuem W., Howell K., Ranfagni S. 2023. A step-by-step process of thematic analysis to develop a conceptual model in qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Me- thods, 22. https://doi.org/10.1177/16094069231205789 Nair P.R. 2007. The coming of age of agroforestry. Journal of the Sci- ence of Food and Agriculture, 87, 9: 1613–1619. https://doi. org/10.1002/jsfa.2897 Nastis S.A., Mattas K., Baourakis G. 2019. Understanding farmers’ behavior towards sustainable practices and their perceptions of risk. Sustainability, 11, 5. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11051303 Nath T.K., Magendran M. 2021. Urban community forest in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: current management, public uses and willin- gness toward conservation. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 40, 8: 749–766. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2020.1796709 Noeldeke B., Winter E., Ntawuhiganayo E.B. 2022. Representing hu- man decision-making in agent-based simulation models: agro- forestry adoption in rural Rwanda. Ecological Economics, 200: 107529. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107529 Nuddin A., Arsyad M., Putera M.I., Nuringsih N., Teshome T.T. 2019. Making the case for institutional support on designing agrofo- restry technology models for rehabilitating critical lands. Forest and Society, 3, 1. https://doi.org/10.24259/fs.v3i1.5975 Ofoegbu C., Chirwa P.W. 2019. Analysis of rural people’s attitude to- wards the management of tribal forests in South Africa. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 38, 4: 396–411. https://doi.org/10.108 0/10549811.2018.1554495 Owusu V., Akoto-Adjepong V., Acheampong E., Barnes V.R. 2022. Far- mer perceptions and economic performance of cocoa agrofore- stry shade levels in Ghana. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 41, 10: 922–940. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2021.18834 44 Pantera Α., Mosquera-Losada M.R., Herzog F., den Herder M. 2021. Agroforestry and the environment. Agroforestry Systems, 95, 5: 767–774. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10457-021-00640-8 Papaioannou E.A., Stefanou S., Gakis S.F., Netsikas E.N., Mavridis A. 2019. Growth, forest floor, and soil chemical analysis compari- son between two management practices in chestnut forests of Greece. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 38, 6: 526–541. https:// doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2019.1598438 Paudel A., Weiss G. 2011. A review of forest policies focusing on fiscal instruments in community forestry of Nepal. The Initiation, 4: 82–91. https://doi.org/10.3126/init.v4i0.5539 Ofoegbu C., Ifejika-Speranza C. 2017. Assessing rural peoples’ inten- tion to adopt sustainable forest use and management practices in South Africa. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 36, 7: 729–746. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2017.1365612 26 Ariyanto K.: Systematic review of sustainable forest management: integrating community forestry and agroforestry ... Paudel A., Weiss G. 2013. Fiscal policy and its implication for com- munity forestry in Nepal. International Forestry Review, 15, 3: 348–354. https://doi.org/10.1505/146554813807700074 Paudel S., Sah J.P. 2015. Effects of different management practices on stand composition and species diversity in subtropical forests in Nepal: implications of community participation in biodiversity conservation. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 34, 8: 738–760. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2015.1036298 Pendly M., Bloomberg M., Visser R. 2015. Investigating the regional variation in rules and best management practices for forestry in New Zealand. Australasian Journal of Environmental Mana- gement, 22, 3: 298–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/14486563.2 014.991768 Place F., Otsuka K., Scherr S.J. (Eds.). 2004. Property rights, col- lective action and agroforestry. https://doi.org/10.22004/ ag.econ.16552 Plieninger T., Muñoz-Rojas J., Buck L.E., Scherr S.J. 2020. Agrofore- stry for sustainable landscape management. Sustainability Sci- ence, 15, 5: 1255–1266. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11625-020- 00836-4 Poudel D.P. 2014. REDD+ comes with money, not with development: an analysis of post-pilot project scenarios from the community forestry of Nepal Himalaya. International Journal of Sustainable Development and World Ecology, 21, 6: 552–562. https://doi.or g/10.1080/13504509.2014.970242 Poudyal B.H., Maraseni T., Cockfield G. 2020. Scientific forest ma- nagement practice in Nepal: critical reflections from stakehol- ders’ perspectives. Forests, 11, 1. https://doi.org/10.3390/ f11010027 Qin T., Gu X., Tian Z., Deng J. 2015. Comparison of agriculture and forestry fiscal subsidy policies in China. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 34, 8: 683–697. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2 015.1025286 Quandt A., Neufeldt H., Gorman K. 2023. Climate change adaptati- on through agroforestry: opportunities and gaps. Current Opi- nion in Environmental Sustainability, 60: 101244. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cosust.2022.101244 Race D., Sumirat B. 2015. Exploring the implications of social inequa- lities in community forestry: emerging lessons from two forests in Indonesia. International Journal of Sustainable Development, 18, 3, 211. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJSD.2015.070233 Saqib N., Khan H. 2022. Agroforestry practices affecting farm income in rural Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, Pakistan. Sarhad Journal of Agri- culture, 38, 3: 928–935. Sarfo-Adu G.K. 2021. Role of forest related policies and laws on su- stainable forest management practice: a critical overview. Jour- nal of Resources Development and Management, 73: 46–55. Broekhoven G., von Scheliha S., Shannon M., Savenije H. 2012. Mo- ving forward with forest governance—a synthesis. ETFRN news, 53, april.: VII-XV. https://fire-smart-landscapes.tropenbos.org/ file.php/699/synthesis-g.broekhoven-s.vonscheliha-m.shanon- h.savenije.pdf (15. 11. 2024). Swallow B., Russell D., Fay C. 2006. Agroforestry and environmental governance. World Agroforestry into the Future: 85–94. https:// citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document?repid=rep1andtype=pdfanddoi =98f9fa0118000fa7e8ce25e6d9b7853600295fba Tadele M., Birhane E., Kidu G., G-Wahid H., Rannestad M.M. 2020. Contribution of parkland agroforestry in meeting fuel wood de- mand in the dry lands of Tigray, Ethiopia. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 39, 8: 841–853. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2 020.1738946 Tebkew M., Atinkut H.B. 2022. Impact of forest decentralizati- on on sustainable forest management and livelihoods in East Africa. Trees, Forests and People, 10: 100346. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tfp.2022.100346 Thoai T.Q., Ranola R.F. 2010. Decision making by upland farmers on forest management in the northwest mountainous region of Vietnam. Journal of ISSAAS [International Society for Southeast Asian Agricultural Sciences] (Philippines), 16, 1. https://agris. fao.org/search/en/providers/122430/records/647369b72c1d 629bc980a880 Thompson M.P., Marcot B.G., Thompson F.R., McNulty S., Fisher L.A., Runge M.C., Cleaves D., Tomosy M. 2022. The science of decisio- nmaking: applications for sustainable forest and grassland ma- nagement in the National Forest System. (Gen. Tech. Rep., WO- GTR-88). Washington, DC, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. https://doi.org/10.2737/WO-GTR-88 Tonn B., English M., Travis C. 2000. A framework for understanding and improving environmental decision making. Journal of Envi- ronmental Planning and Management, 43, 2: 163–183. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09640560010658 Tumpach C., Dwivedi P., Izlar R., Cook C. 2018. Understanding per- ceptions of stakeholder groups about Forestry Best Management Practices in Georgia. Journal of Environmental Management, 213: 374–381. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.02.045 United Nations. b. l. World population projected to reach 9.8 billion in 2050, and 11.2 billion in 2100. https://www.un.org/en/desa/ world-population-projected-reach-98-billion-2050-and-112- billion-2100 (18. 9. 2024). van Noordwijk M. 2019. Sustainable development through trees on farms: agroforestry in its fifth decade. World Agroforestry (ICRAF). Vianna A.L.M., Fearnside P.M. 2014. Impact of community forest ma- nagement on biomass carbon stocks in the Uatumã Sustainable Development Reserve, Amazonas, Brazil. Journal of Sustainable Forestry, 33, 2: 127–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10549811.2 013.836717 Wilson M.H., Lovell S.T. 2016. Agroforestry - the next step in susta- inable and resilient agriculture. Sustainability, 8, 6. https://doi. org/10.3390/su8060574 Wood P.J. 1988. Agroforestry and decision-making in rural deve- lopment. Forest Ecology and Management, 24, 3: 191–201. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-1127(88)90044-8 Zoysa M.D., Inoue M. 2014. Climate change impacts, agroforestry adaptation and policy environment in Sri Lanka. Open Journal of Forestry, 4, 5. https://doi.org/10.4236/ojf.2014.45049 Tanveer Hussain T.H., Khan G.S., Khan S.A., Nasir Masood N.M., Mu- hammad Ashfaq M.A., Naila Sarwer N.S. 2012. Farmers’ agro forestry in Pakistan, farmers’ role-trends and attitudes. Current Research Journal of Social Sciences, 4, 1: 29–35. https://www. cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/full/10.5555/20123103002