Landscape Ecology-Based Approach for Assessing Pekarangan Condition to Preserve Protected Area in West Java

  • Regan Leonardus KaswantoEmail author
  • Nobukazu Nakagoshi
Part of the Ecological Research Monographs book series (ECOLOGICAL)


As is widely known, the landscape ecology-based approach focuses on three aspects: structure, function, and dynamic or change. The fourth aspect, which was added recently, is culture. These four aspects were attempted to be elaborated into the homegardens condition as an ecological process in human activities. As traditional homegardens in Indonesia, pekarangan played an important role in building low carbon society management. To conserve protected areas, the pekarangan concept could be one solution to help people stay in their village. It means people will not encroach on the forest to seek more income because they could have it from pekarangan. Assessment of the pekarangan condition was conducted through interviewing and measuring the ecological, economic, and sociocultural data of 96 households located in four watersheds of West Java, Indonesia. The levels of landscape management are affected by the size of land; therefore, the scale of ownership of pekarangan size is considered. In each respective watershed level, four groups of pekarangan were defined in a purposive random village. Those four groups are G1, with a pekarangan size less than 120 m2 that does not have other agricultural land (OAL), G2 (<120 m2 with OAL < 1,000 m2), G3 (120–400 m2 with no OAL), and G4 (120–400 m2 with OAL < 1,000 m2). The results statistically proved that pekarangan contributed significantly to ecological conditions, household income, and also nutrition (diet) for the family members. The ecological conditions, both horizontal and vertical biodiversity, showed that pekarangan offer a large contribution to help the environment be more sustainable. The levels of heterogeneity, indicated by species richness (Margalef Index), species diversity (Shannon–Wiener Index), species evenness (Simpson Index), and similarity (Sørensen Index) showed that pekarangan has high biodiversity. The research also proved that pekarangan production contributed as much as 11.5 % of a household’s income and 12.9 % of household’s diet in term of food expense. One recommendation is that the community should consider a suitable agroforestry practice, such as pekarangan, for better landscape management in the future. In addition, pekarangan as a small agroforestry system also can contribute significantly to a region’s carbon budget while simultaneously enhancing the livelihoods of the rural population.


Agroforestry system Environment conservation Homegardens Landscape management Rural landscape 



This research was supported by the Global Environmental Leaders (GELs) Education Program for Designing a Low Carbon Society (LCS) by Hiroshima University, Japan. Preliminary survey was a cooperative work between the Rural Development Institute (RDI), Seattle, USA and the Department of Landscape Architecture, Bogor Agricultural University, Indonesia. This paper has been presented in the 8th World Congress of the International Association for Landscape Ecology (IALE) on August 18–23, 2011 in Beijing, China.


  1. Abdoellah O, Hadikusumah H, Takeuchi K, Okubo S, Parikesit (2006) Commercialization of homegardens in an Indonesian village: vegetation composition and functional changes. In: Kumar B, Nair P (eds) Tropical homegardens. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 233–250. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-4948-4_13 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arifin HS, Nakagoshi N (2011) Landscape ecology and urban biodiversity in tropical Indonesian cities. Landsc Ecol Eng 7(1):33–43. doi: 10.1007/s11355-010-0145-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Arifin HS, Sakamoto K, Takeuchi T (2001) Study of rural landscape structure based on its different bio-climatic conditions in middle part of Citarum Watershed, Cianjur District, West Java, Indonesia. In: JSPS-DGHE (ed) Core university program in applied biosciences, Tokyo. The University of Tokyo, Japan, pp 99–108Google Scholar
  4. Arifin HS, Munandar A, Mugnisjah WQ, Budiarti T, Arifin NHS, Pramukanto Q (2008) Homestead plot survey on Java. Rural Development Institute (RDI), SeattleGoogle Scholar
  5. Christanty L, Abdoellah OS, Marten GG, Iskandar J (1986) Traditional agroforestry in West Java: the pekarangan (homegardens) and kebun talun (annual-perennial rotation) cropping systems. In: Marten GG (ed) Traditional agriculture in South-east Asia. Westview, Boulder, pp 132–158Google Scholar
  6. Das T, Das A (2010) Litter production and decomposition in the forested areas of traditional homegardens: a case study from Barak Valley, Assam, northeast India. Agrofor Syst 79(2):157–170. doi: 10.1007/s10457-010-9284-0 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Death R (2008) Margalef’s index. In: Sven Erik J, Brian F (eds) Encyclopedia of ecology. Academic, Oxford, pp 2209–2210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Elliott KJ, Knoepp JD (2005) The effects of three regeneration harvest methods on plant diversity and soil characteristics in the southern Appalachians. For Ecol Manag 211(3):296–317. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2005.02.064 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Forman RTT, Godron M (1986) Landscape ecology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  10. Gajaseni J, Gajaseni N (1999) Ecological rationalities of the traditional homegarden system in the Chao Phraya Basin, Thailand. Agrofor Syst 46(1):3–23. doi: 10.1023/a:1006188504677 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Harashina K, Takeuchi K, Tsunekawa A, Arifin HS (2003) Nitrogen flows due to human activities in the Cianjur-Cisokan watershed area in the middle Citarum drainage basin, West Java, Indonesia: a case study at hamlet scale. Agric Ecosyst Environ 100(1):75–90. doi: 10.1016/S0167-8809(03)00173-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Harjadi S (1989) Introduction to horticulture. Life Science Inter University Center, Bogor Agricultural University, BogorGoogle Scholar
  13. Hong J, Liu S, Shi G, Zhang Y (2012) Soil seed bank techniques for restoring wetland vegetation diversity in Yeyahu Wetland, Beijing. Ecol Eng 42:192–202. doi: 10.1016/j.ecoleng.2012.01.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kaswanto, Arifin HS, Munandar A, Iiyama K (2008) Sustainable water management in the rural landscape of Cianjur Watershed, Cianjur District, West Java, Indonesia. J Int Soc Southeast Asian Agric Sci 14(1):33–45Google Scholar
  15. Kaswanto, Nakagoshi N, Arifin HS (2010) Impact of land use changes on spatial pattern of landscape during two decades (1989–2009) in West Java region. Hikobia 15:363–376Google Scholar
  16. Kumar BM (2011) Species richness and aboveground carbon stocks in the homegardens of central Kerala, India. Agric Ecosyst Environ 140(3/4):430–440. doi: 10.1016/j.agee.2011.01.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kumar BM, Nair PKR (2004) The enigma of tropical homegardens. Agrofor Syst 61–62(1):135–152. doi: 10.1023/ Google Scholar
  18. Miller PR, Winer AM (1984) Composition and dominance in Los Angeles Basin urban vegetation. Urban Ecol 8(1-2):29–54. doi: 10.1016/0304-4009(84)90005-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mitchell R, Hanstad T (2004) Small homegarden plots and sustainable livelihoods for the poor. FAO LSP Working Paper 11. Access to Natural Resources Sub-Programme. Rural Development Institue (RDI), Seattle, USAGoogle Scholar
  20. Molebatsi LY, Siebert SJ, Cilliers SS, Struwig M, Kruger A (2010) A comparative floristic analysis of peri-urban and rural homegardens in North-West, South Africa. S Afr J Bot 76(2):414. doi: 10.1016/j.sajb.2010.02.076 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Montagnini F (2006) Homegardens of Mesoamerica: biodiversity, food security, and nutrient management. In: Kumar B, Nair P (eds) Tropical homegardens. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 61–84. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-4948-4_5 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Nagendra H (2002) Opposite trends in response for the Shannon and Simpson indices of landscape diversity. Appl Geogr 22(2):175–186. doi: 10.1016/s0143-6228(02)00002-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nair PKR, Kumar BM (2006) Introduction. In: Kumar B, Nair P (eds) Tropical homegardens. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 1–10. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-4948-4_1 Google Scholar
  24. Niñez V (1984) Household gardens: theoretical considerations on an old survival strategy. Potatoes in Food Systems Research series report No. 1. International Potato Center, Lima, PeruGoogle Scholar
  25. Roshetko JM, Delaney M, Hairiah K, Purnomosidhi P (2002) Carbon stocks in Indonesian homegarden systems: can smallholder systems be targeted for increased carbon storage? Am J Altern Agric 17(3):138–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Roshetko J, Lasco R, Angeles M (2007) Smallholder agroforestry systems for carbon storage. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Change 12(2):219–242. doi: 10.1007/s11027-005-9010-9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Schultink G (2000) Critical environmental indicators: performance indices and assessment models for sustainable rural development planning. Ecol Model 130(1-3):47–58. doi: 10.1016/s0304-3800(00)00212-x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Soemarwoto O (1984) The talun-kebun system, a modified shifting cultivation, in West Java. Environmentalist 4:96–98. doi: 10.1007/bf01907300 Google Scholar
  29. Soemarwoto O (1987) Homegardens: a traditional agroforestry system with promising future. In: Steppler HA, Nair PKR (eds) A decade of development. ICRAF, Nairobi, pp 157–170Google Scholar
  30. Tabuti JRS, Muwanika VB, Arinaitwe MZ, Ticktin T (2011) Conservation of priority woody species on farmlands: a case study from Nawaikoke sub-county, Uganda. Appl Geogr 31(2):456–462. doi: 10.1016/j.apgeog.2010.10.006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Takeuchi K (2010) Rebuilding the relationship between people and nature: the Satoyama initiative. Ecol Res 25(5):7. doi: 10.1007/s11284-010-0745-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Wezel A, Bender S (2003) Plant species diversity of homegardens of Cuba and its significance for household food supply. Agrofor Syst 57(1):39–49. doi: 10.1023/a:1022973912195 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wiersum K (2006) Diversity and change in homegarden cultivation in Indonesia. In: Kumar B, Nair P (eds) Tropical homegardens. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 13–24. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4020-4948-4_2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Japan 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Landscape Management Division, Landscape Architecture DepartmentBogor Agricultural University (IPB)Dramaga-BogorIndonesia
  2. 2.Graduate School for International Development and CooperationHiroshima UniversityHigashi-HiroshimaJapan

Personalised recommendations