Hello Jean-claude Eono: The project which you described is interesting. I think I am missing something there. When you wrote that the program is successful because it is free, what do you mean by that? Are youth not being paid for their labour contribution? IF so who is paying the youth? I think land owners are paying. What are the potential alternate uses of that landbase? My observation from Indian agroforestry adoption is that land owners are highly responsive to the rate of return of the land base. I am not saying that they do not consider non-timber values. But if those benefits are external to these land owners, they put more weight on their monetary benefit. If the non-market benefits are external, they have to be compensated to undertake tree planting until the net benefits are zero! Janaki Alavalapati Department of Rural Economy University of Alberta Edmonton, Canada
Mail converted by
MHonArc 1.1.0