See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/333443967

Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest

Chapter · May 2019

DOI: 10.1007/978-981-13-6830-1_10

CITATIONS READS

18 2,786

9 authors, including:

Sumit Chakravarty Nazir A. Pala

Uttar Banga Krishi Vishwavidyalaya Sher-e-Kashmir University of Agricultural Sciences and Technology of Kashmir
141 PUBLICATIONS   1,046 CITATIONS    203 PUBLICATIONS   1,693 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Bisleshna Tamang Biplov Chandra Sarkar

Uttar Banga Krishi Vishwavidyalaya North Eastern Hill University
7 PUBLICATIONS   43 CITATIONS    30 PUBLICATIONS   151 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Retrieval of biophysical parameters in Buxa tiger reserve using GISAT View project

Allelopathic Effect of Lantana camara View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Gopal Shukla on 12 June 2019.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside
Forest

Sumit Chakravarty, Nazir A. Pala, Bisleshna Tamang,

Biplov C. Sarkar, Abha Manohar K, Prakash Rai, Anju Puri,
Vineeta, and Gopal Shukla

Contents
1   Introduction  328
2   TOF Classification  330
3   Ambiguities in TOF Classification  330
4   TOF and Sustainability  331
5   Diversity, Biomass and C Stock of TOF  333
6   TOF Inventory  337
7   Livelihood Importance  339
8   Problems of Growing TOFs  340
9   Conclusion  341
10  Recommendations and Future Research  341
References  343

Abstract
Trees or other woody vegetation growing outside designated forest areas are
known as trees outside forest (TOFs). These trees have many ecosystem services
and economic benefits like their potential role in agriculture, food supply and
income by providing goods and services, conservation of biodiversity and carbon
(C) sequestration. They can improve soil fertility through fixing atmospheric
nitrogen, retaining soil moisture, regulating water shed, reducing topsoil loss and
litter fall and regulating microclimate, thus increasing crop yield. In addition to
providing aesthetic beauty especially to urban surroundings, they are pollutant
sink, reduce ozone levels, check dust flow, reduce noise pollution and cools air
temperature. Most importantly, these trees are useful timber resources and will

S. Chakravarty (*) · N. A. Pala · B. Tamang · B. C. Sarkar

Abha Manohar K · P. Rai · Vineeta · G. Shukla
Department of Forestry, Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Pundibari, West Bengal, India
A. Puri
Baring Union Christian College, Batala, Punjab, India

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 327

M. K. Jhariya et al. (eds.), Sustainable Agriculture, Forest and Environmental
Management, [Link]
328 S. Chakravarty et al.

alleviate pressure on native forests. Forest and TOF are thus considered as two
faces of a coin in relation to their capacity for C stock and biodiversity. Substantial
amount of trees are going on lands other than forest land used in every country
with a potential of sequestering about 38 giga tonnes of C annually. In India, for
example, there are about 24–25 thousand million TOFs, out of which trees in
agricultural landscape in Indian state of Uttar Pradesh only sequester 20 million
tonnes of C. The C sequestration potential of the TOFs is thus enormous to be
included in global climate mitigation strategy through reducing emission from
deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+) activities. Moreover, as these are
additional plantations, so are they complementary with other land uses in miti-
gating climate change. Unfortunately, due to absence of efficient inventory meth-
ods, TOFs are still not accounted fully in the national forest inventories, due to
which very less or no information are available for TOFs. Accounting TOF and
its services will not only help to understand its importance for national C budget
but also its ecological and economic role benefiting human society.

Keywords
Biomass · Climate change · Diversity · Ecosystem services · Tree outside forest

Abbreviations

CDM Clean development mechanism

C Carbon
CO2 Carbon dioxide
FAO Food and Agricultural Organization
FSI Forest Survey of India
NFI National Forest Inventory
NFMA National Forest Monitoring and Assessment
TOFs Trees outside forest
REDD Reducing emission from deforestation and forest degradation

1 Introduction

Global climatic change and biodiversity loss are major concerns in terms of sustain-
ing future generations and a debatable issue among the global scientific community
and policymakers (Zhang et al. 2011; IPCC 2013; ter Steege et al. 2013; Jhariya
2017; Raj et al. 2018a, b). Agro-forests, community forests, village woodlots, road
side plantation, urban plantation and other trees outside forest (TOFs) are also piv-
otal in combating global climatic change and reduce biodiversity loss and can be
effective segments of sustainability (Roshetko et al. 2007; Kumar and Nair 2011;
Meena et al. 2018; Jhariya et al. 2018). Forest is not all trees and all trees are not
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 329

forest. Huge amount of tree resources exist in almost all the countries but generally
were ignored, and attention is given to forests only. However, from a past decade or
two, the ecological and societal benefits of TOF are gaining recognition (Schnell
2015). Schnell (2015) reported that TOF was much mentioned as early as seven-
teenth century in the book Silvicultura Oeconomica by Carlowitz (1713). However,
tree has been associated with human civilization outside forest from time immemo-
rial in the form of agroforestry and urban plantations, and abundant TOF inventories
have been reported after this book though ignored till Food and Agricultural
Organization (FAO) recognition in the 1990s (Boffa 2000; Herzog 2000;
Bellefontaine et  al. 2002; Pain-Orcet and Bellefontaine 2004). FAO coined TOF
during preparation of the Global Forest Resources Assessment 2000 report (Pain-­
Orcet and Bellefontaine 2004) to increase political attention on TOF (de Foresta
et al. 2013).
The basic definition is TOFs are ‘trees growing outside forest or other wooded
land’ (Bellefontaine et al. 2002; Schnell 2015; Yadav et al. 2017a). TOF in India
according to Forest Survey of India (FSI) is defined as ‘all those trees, which have
attained 10 cm or more diameters at breast height, available on lands, which is not
notified as forests’ (FSI 2013). Definitions of forest vary from country to country
and so TOF also (Lund 2002). So, the internationally accepted and applied defini-
tion is that of FAO which defines ‘TOF as trees available on lands which is not
defined as forests or other wooded land’ (FAO 2005, 2010; Kumar 2006). The word
‘trees’ in the FAO definition also includes shrubs, palms and bamboo (de Foresta
et al. 2013). TOFs are trees growing both in rural and urban areas on farms, com-
mon lands and waste lands and along roads and railway tracks and institutions (FAO
2001a; Bellefontaine et al. 2002, Tamang 2018). Trees outside and inside forests are
similar in many ways (McCullough 1999).
In areas where there is no or less forest, the ecological and economical role of
TOFs can be pivotal (FAO 2001a; Bellefontaine et al. 2002). TOFs can aid in sus-
tainable development through conserving biodiversity in an agricultural-dominant
landscape providing resource base upon which our future generations depend
(Pushpangadan et  al. 1997). In complementary to the ecological and economical
role of forest, these trees store enormous amount of carbon (C) in their biomass,
thus can sustain the carbon dioxide (CO2) balance of the atmosphere. In addition to
this role, TOFs can substantially meet the growing wood and wood product demands,
thus reducing deforestation promoting sustainable development. Maintenance and
periodic assessment of diverse ecosystems and a whole range of biological diversity
therein are, therefore, crucial for long-term survival of humans (Berkes et al. 1998;
Ayensu et al. 1999). Evaluation of TOF structure and function is needed to under-
stand its status and dynamics (de Foresta et al. 2013; Singh et al. 2017). Tree species
richness in any area develops the locality factors for other organisms to develop and
breed and its role in increasing biodiversity (Gene et al. 1978). TOF can also be
critical in sustaining agriculture, food security, household economy and supply of
many products and services apart from being reservoirs of ecological functions like
conservation of biodiversity, C sequestration climatic stabilization and livelihood
support in rural and urban areas (Rawat et  al. 2004; FAO 2005; Acharya 2006;
330 S. Chakravarty et al.

Kumar et al. 2017). However, to realize full potential, TOF needs holistic manage-
ment approach of resource management locally, regionally and globally
(Bellefontaine et al. 2002). This requires efficient inventorying methods integrated
fully with the national forest inventories. The chapter thus briefs the need of TOF
accounting and underlines its services to understand its importance for national C
budget along with its ecological and economic role benefiting human society.

2 TOF Classification

TOF by definition consist of tree formations with varied functions and arrange-
ments, making classification difficult (Kleinn 2000). Such classifications are based
on origin, land use, geometry and function of the trees (Bellefontaine et al. 2002).
FAO also recognized three distinct TOF types as TOF on agricultural, urban and
non-urban non-agriculture land (FAO 2012; Yadav et al. 2017a). TOF on urban land
are trees and/or shrubs growing in gardens, parks, parking lots, along streets and
others. TOF on agriculture land include trees and/or shrubs growing on lands under
agricultural land use. Agroforestry systems, non-forestry tree crop plantations and
orchards are included in agricultural land use. Trees growing on natural lands like
grasslands, tree line in mountainous areas and peat lands are categorized as TOFs
other than urban and agricultural lands. TOFs on non-agricultural/non-urban land
have trees and/or shrubs growing on lands other than agricultural or urban land use,
i.e. outside forests. TOFs growing isolated or scattered, in groups and linearly, are
categorized based on spatial arrangement (Alexandre et  al. 1999). TOFs are also
classified functionally like production (food, fodder, firewood), protection (wind-
breaks, erosion checks), ornamental and aesthetic purposes. Classification of TOFs
based on origin is based on whether trees are planted or are leftover of former for-
ests. The trees leftover of a former forest is reported from Latin America where
virgin forests are harvested (Kleinn 1999).

3 Ambiguities in TOF Classification

Sometime TOF cannot be distinctly classified from forest as for grasslands or pas-
tures and commercial plantations with shade trees and orchards (Kleinn 1999). de
Foresta et al. (2013) also reported problems classifying trees under shifting cultiva-
tion, rubber plantations and linear formation and in some agroforestry practices as
TOF. Shifting cultivation fallow period follows after a crop period when vegetation
regrows making it debatable whether the land is forest or abandoned land after agri-
cultural use. Trees are thus falsely classified either as forest or TOF on such land.
Agroforestry in forest land use where temporary grazing is permitted or interculture
of annual crop is permitted during early age of forest plantations are not TOF
(Schnell 2015). Rubber plantations are also debated, earlier considered as agricul-
tural land use but now recognized as forest (de Foresta et al. 2013).
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 331

Classifying linear tree formations in non-agricultural or non-urban also creates

problem after FAO included trees either growing in lines having more than 20 m
width or in land with area of more than 0.5 ha as forest (Schnell 2015). Moreover,
the definitions and meaning of agricultural and urban lands vary from country to
country (de Foresta et al. 2013). Sometimes, urban forest is not all included in urban
land use but those within and close to the urban areas, i.e. partly in forest land use
also (Konijnendijk 2003). In such a case, Rydberg and Falck (2000) recommended
considering ground vegetation as a basis for classifying, i.e. uncultivated land as
urban forest and cultivated as TOF.

4 TOF and Sustainability

The ecosystem services and economic benefits associated with these trees have
begun to attract more attention towards them (Singh and Chand 2012; de Foresta
et al. 2013). The trees fix atmospheric nitrogen in the soil and aid in nutrient cycling
through litter fall, increasing fertility and thus crop yield. Trees help to retain mois-
ture in soil and topsoil by reducing soil evaporation, checking erosion and reducing
water flow. Trees regulate and maintain watershed-building materials. Trees act as a
live fence in form of windbreaks and shelterbelt performing protection function.
Interest is growing among researchers and policymakers to promote green spaces in
urban areas to curb negative impact of urbanization on biodiversity and humans
(Shwartz et al. 2014). Moreover, these plantations ensure continuous tree cover to
attain benefits for current and future generations (Ajewole 2010).
Every country has extensive tree wealth outside continuous forested areas, and
they make important contribution to sustainable agriculture and supply many prod-
ucts similar to forests (Yadav et al. 2017b). TOF include urban and other plantations
like road side, homestead gardens, residential areas or in various institutional or
academic landscapes. They form important green region in urban and industrial sec-
tors (Schnell 2015, Yadav et  al. 2017a; Tamang 2018). An important feature of
urban landscape is its trees growing along the roadside or streets (Houde 1997;
McPherson and Luttinger 1998). These trees give aesthetic beauty to an urban sur-
rounding providing psychological harmony to the urban residents (Kuchelmeister
and Braatz 1993). Several studies also have highlighted these trees as an important
feature of rural landscapes (Bellefontaine et al. 2001; Gutzwiller 2002; de Foresta
et al. 2013; Datta et al. 2017). These trees are planted widely in all physiographic
regions of the globe with socioeconomic and ecological implications (de Foresta
et al. 2013). The green spaces are useful for different habitats, provide cultural ser-
vices and promote human well-being making positive contribution to living condi-
tions of different towns and cities (Mitchell and Popham 2008; Bowler et al. 2010;
Arnberger 2012; Buchel and Frantzeskaki 2015).
Trees in urban landscape not only have aesthetic value but make these localities
serene and green for agreeable places to work and live. Studies reported a concept
‘proximate principle’ (Table  1) wherein people are willing to own a property in a
greener and open locality even with higher price (Wolf 2005, 2007; Chaudhury 2006).
332 S. Chakravarty et al.

Table 1  Proximate principle Property value hike Location of property

10% Within ¼ mile (0.4 km) of a park
20% Near to or facing a park
32% Within or close to green belts

These trees are useful timber resources that will alleviate the pressure on native
forests; nutrient cycling and CO2 sink (Chavan and Rasal 2010; Curlevski et  al.
2010; Mandal and Joshi 2014; Nowak et al. 2018). The consequences are reducing
the pressure on natural forest in one way and C enhancement and species diversity
in other way (Singh and Lodhiyal 2009; Thompson et al. 2009; Singh and Chand
2012). This satisfies the objective of reducing emission from deforestation and for-
est degradation (REDD+) mechanism. Therefore, forest and TOF are considered as
two faces of a coin in relation to their capacity for C stock and biodiversity (Kleinn
2000). The C sequestration potential of these plantations is also high enough to be
included in global climate mitigation strategy. These are additional plantations and
so are complementary with other land uses (Schoeneberger 2009; Plieninger 2011;
Thangata and Hildebrand 2012).
Urban trees and plantation along the road and canal side can act as sink for pol-
lutants; reduce urban O3 levels; check dust flow, fly ash and noise pollution; cool air
temperature; and provide aesthetic beauty to the urban landscape (Chavan and Rasal
2010; Nowak et al. 2018).TOFs are ecologically important for urban localities as
they fix atmospheric C in their biomass, modify microclimate, fix airborne pollut-
ants and control storm water runoff (Rowntree and Nowak 1991; McPherson 1994;
Srinidhi et al. 2007). Road side trees are more efficient to fix particulate matter than
other trees and thus are critical in controlling point source pollution (Beckett et al.
2000). Short-rotation trees, i.e. eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.), poplar (Populus spp.),
willows (Salix spp.) etc., are the most commonly employed trees for combating
toxic chemicals and keep intrusion of pollutants away from the food chain. Other
important trees are neem (Azadirachta indica), siris (Albizia spp.), kassod (Cassia
siamea), silver oak (Grevillea robusta), etc.
TOFs are valuable vegetation C pools and plant biodiversity or microhabitat cen-
tres and are critical biodiversity hotspots (Kharal and Oli 2008; Oleyar et al. 2008;
Jim and Chen 2009; Goddard et  al. 2010). Isolated trees and urban woods have
cultural and socioeconomic with aesthetic and recreational values as well (Herzog
2000; Tyrvainen et al. 2005; McDonnell et al. 2009; Grala et al. 2010; Buragohain
et al. 2017). Their importance is recognized now due to biodiversity loss, desertifi-
cation and poverty alleviation. These plantations have the potential to provide eco-
systems services in the form of preventing soil erosion, removing air pollutants,
modifying microclimate and soil properties, nutrient and water cycling, regulating
water flows, biodiversity conservation, pest control, food or fodder and wood prod-
ucts (Baudry et al. 2000; Verma 2000; Chiesura 2004; Plieninger et al. 2004;
Lumsden and Bennett 2005; Ahmed 2008; Bhagwat et al. 2008; Pandey 2008; Jim
and Chen 2009; Manning et al. 2009; Bowler et al. 2010; Paletto and Chincarini
2012; Ament and Begley 2014).
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 333

5 Diversity, Biomass and C Stock of TOF

Deforestation and climate change has threatened extinction of about 8000 tree spe-
cies, or 9% of the total global tree species (Singh et al. 2005; FAO 2010). Assessing
plant diversity, its management and sustainable utilization requires proper docu-
mentation and quantification of qualitative and quantitative parameters of plant
community (Jayanthi and Rajendran 2013; Padalia et al. 2014; Rajendra et al. 2014).
The cultural, socioeconomic and ecological potential of TOFs was increasingly rec-
ognized after the mid-1970s with popularization of tree planting programmes
mainly outside forests. These programmes were initiated mainly to meet the grow-
ing demands of wood and its products along with reclamation of problematic lands
and maintaining ecological health (Nair 2012). Plantation of trees outside forest has
been playing positive roles in C enhancement and biodiversity conservation (Leah
et al. 2010). There are many reports on plant diversity and C stocks from areas out-
side forest especially from institutional landscapes (Dubal et al. 2013; Suryawanshi
et al. 2014; Tiwari et al. 2014; Thankappan et al. 2015; Ranjan et al. 2016; Sharma
and Ekka 2016).
These institutional areas generally have large vegetative areas supporting excel-
lent tree cover which can counter balance C emissions through C storage and
sequestration (Gavali and Shaikh 2016; Singh et al. 2017). C capture rates of these
landscapes vary with locality factors and management practices (Rahman et  al.
2015). Studies on vegetation cover from various universities and roadside planta-
tions have documented species richness, dominant species, plant population and
uses along with tree biomass and C storage (Baral et al. 2013; Rajendra et al. 2014;
Suryawanshi et al. 2014; Tiwari et al. 2014; Rahman et al. 2015; Singh and Singh
2015; Gavali and Shaikh 2016; Sharma and Ekka 2016; Singh et al. 2017; Varma et
al. 2017). Deforestation can be checked by extensive plantations of trees in such
landscapes which will reduce the pressure on natural forest as these trees have the
potential to meet the demand of wood and its products.
Studies also reported potential of orchards for C cycling, storage and net CO2
flux (Sekikawa et al. 2002; Sofo et al. 2005). Orchards are similar to forests in terms
of C sequestration during its initial years of establishment (Kerckhoffs and Reid
1997). Fruit tree-based plantations in southern Philippines were reported with a C
storage of 112.18–203.62 tonne/ha (Janiola and Marin 2016). Fruit trees with diam-
eter more than 30 cm in certain land use make large contribution to total C stock,
and the above-ground components especially the fruit trees show the greatest
amount of biomass and C (Janiola and Marin 2016). Orchards store C in their woody
biomass, and it can also be viable strategy for climate change mitigation in an
agricultural-­dominant landscape. Forests and also TOFs in the developing countries
coexist with smallholder farming systems including agroforestry, thus sustaining
smallholders and diversity as well in an agricultural-dominant landscape (Gilmour
1997; Regmi 1998; Garforth et al. 1999; Baral et al. 2013). In addition, agroforestry
systems are also efficient C sink in human-dominated landscapes especially in the
urban areas (Bhagwat et  al. 2008; Kharal and Oli 2008; Pandit et  al. 2014). The
major social and agroforestry tree species in India are eucalyptus, babool (Acacia
334 S. Chakravarty et al.

nilotica), poplar, maharukh (Ailanthus excelsa), bakain (Melia azedarach), willows,

shisham (Dalbergia sissoo), subabul (Leucaena leucocephala), gamhar (Gmelina
arborea), beach oak (Casuarina equisetifolia) and white locust tree (Robinia pseu-
doacacia) grown on about eight million hectares area (Chauhan et al. 2008; Dogra
and Chauhan 2016).
Commercial plantations of cacao (Theobroma cacao), tea (Camellia sinensis),
rubber (Hevea brasiliensis) and others are reported to restore C stocks after replace-
ment of the native forests (Sonwa et al. 2009; Oke and Olatiilu 2011; Norgrove and
Hauser 2013; Dawoe et al. 2016). Forest and tree plantation have the capacity to
store more C than other types of vegetation (Lasco et al. 2002). The long life span
of these plantations makes them potential C sink under different ecosystems (Cotta
et  al. 2006; Ranasinghe and Silva 2007; Ranasinghe and Thimothias 2012).
Controlling the present level of atmospheric CO2 through REDD+ activities is the
most viable and feasible strategy recommended by scientists and policymakers
(Kanowski et al. 2011; Pandey et al. 2014; Rahman et al. 2015; Yadava et al. 2017),
and trees outside forest efficiently can fulfil the objectives of this strategy (FAO
2006; Canadell et al. 2007; Lewis et al. 2009). This is because of positive relation-
ship between species diversity and total biomass reported for these plantations
(Singh and Singh 2015; Jhariya and Yadav 2018).
Globally there is very less or no information available on TOF resources that too
are rarely integrated with national forest inventories. This is because till date there
are no efficient methods of inventorying TOF resources, except for a recent analysis
of existing data from available country-level TOF inventories by Schnell (2015).
This analysis reported that in the analysed countries, TOFs contribute substantial
amount of biomass and C to national stock. The result of this work will be a way
forward from forest centred to all trees including TOFs that are valuable resource
economically and ecologically. The analysis concluded that forest- and tree-based
land uses of the studied countries varied extensively (Table 2).
Kyrgyzstan, Bangladesh and Lebanon were reported with lowest forest cover but
has highest OL indicating land use category where TOF grows. In continuation of

Table 2  Area of TOFs and forest (Schnell 2015)

Country Forest Other wooded land Other land
Bangladesh 8.1a 0.7 76.8
Cameroon 44.2 31.1 23.5
Costa Rica 46.7 1.8 43.1
The Gambia 26.6 10.9 52.1
Guatemala 37.3 16.3 42.6
Honduras 42.7 11.7 34.7
Kyrgyzstan 3.4 3.1 88.8
Lebanon 12.6 10.4 71.7
Nicaragua 25.0 17.0 48.8
Philippines 23.8 12.2 61.3
Zambia 63.9 7.4 19.7
Figures are per cent of total land area
a
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 335

Table 2, Table 3 presents the live above-ground tree biomass of TOF of the countries
in comparison to its forest (Schnell 2015).
Six countries were estimated with above 10% of their total tree biomass contrib-
uted by TOFs, and exceptionally high contribution (73.2%) was reported from
Bangladesh (Schnell 2015). Significant amount of TOF (more than 80%) was found
by Schnell (2015) growing on agricultural land (Table 4).
About 49 million trees on private land were reported from Gujarat state of India
(GoG 1984). Farmlands in India were estimate with a total of 16,578 million trees
(Kotwal and Bhattacharya 2000). National assessment of trees outside forest esti-
mated between 24,000 and 25,000 million trees in India (Prasad et al. 2000). A total
of 671,852 trees of teak (Tectona grandis), 483,876 trees of mango (Mangifera
indica), 288,995 trees of shisham, 99,053 trees of neem, 36,748 trees of jackfruit
(Artocarpus heterophyllus) and 68,909 tree of babool were inventoried into

Table 3  Estimated above-ground biomass (Schnell 2015)

Forest Other wooded land Other land
Country AGB PTTB AGB PTTB AGB PTTB
Bangladesh 33.4 26.7 7.7 0.5 9.6 72.8
Cameroon 159.9 89.4 14.6 5.8 16.4 4.9
Costa Rica 104.0 93.0 0.0 0.0 8.5 7.0
The Gambia 21.8 57.6 8.0 8.7 6.5 33.7
Guatemala 80.6 86.0 9.3 4.3 7.9 9.6
Honduras 79.2 91.0 9.3 2.9 6.5 6.0
Kyrgyzstan 30.2 84.2 1.0 2.6 0.2 13.2
Lebanon 24.6 51.6 4.6 7.9 3.4 40.5
Nicaragua 74.1 74.4 12.6 8.6 8.6 17.0
Philippines 82.6 69.0 10.5 4.5 12.3 26.5
Zambia 32.0 95.1 4.9 1.7 3.6 3.3
AGB above-ground biomass expressed as Mg ha−1, PTTB proportion of total tree biomass of the
studied country expressed as per cent

Table 4  Distribution of trees outside forests (values in %) (Schnell 2015)

Country Natural Agriculture Settlement
Bangladesh 0.0 16.0 84.0
Cameroon 17.6 80.7 1.8
Costa Rica 0.0 96.4 3.6
The Gambia 17.3 82.1 0.5
Guatemala 10.9 83.2 5.9
Honduras 6.4 85.6 8.1
Kyrgyzstan 35.6 26.4 37.4
Lebanon 3.3 89.8 6.9
Nicaragua 2.7 93.5 3.8
Philippines 6.4 88.4 5.2
Zambia 30.0 62.7 7.3
336 S. Chakravarty et al.

different diameter classes for 66 villages of Gorakhpur district, Uttar Pradesh, in

India (Srivastav et al. 2012). The total number of enumerated trees in this inventory
for all six species with respect to diameter class is given in Table 5.
The study described above adopted a field survey method following stratified
random sampling to select villages to enumerate number of trees. This study though
classified tree based on diameter classes but did not monitor the biomass accumu-
lated. Such studies are very laborious and time consuming. Biomass quantification
is required to estimate C sequestration, so TOF inventory must include estimates of
biomass and C storage in it. Stand-wise TOF inventory of Haryana, India, was made
using finer spatial resolution of IRS-P6 LISS-IV satellite data (Singh and Chand
2012). Above-ground TOF biomass estimated for scattered trees was 1.26 tonnes/ha
and for trees growing canal side was 91.5 tonnes/ha. The total above-ground TOF
biomass and C stock estimated were 367.04 and 174.34  tonnes/ha, respectively
(Table 6). The study shows that assessment of TOF biomass and its C accumulation
can be successfully achieved by integrating GIS techniques, field data and high-­
spatial-­resolution data of IRS-P6 LISS-IV for the larger areas.
Trees growing in agricultural landscapes improve productivity and create C sink
as well. C accumulated by semiarid, subhumid, humid and temperate region of
agroforestry land use system was 9, 21, 50 and 63 Mg C ha−1, respectively (Schroeder
1994). In the next half a century or so, about 38 giga tonnes of C would be seques-
tered globally by afforestation/reforestation and agroforestry practices. About 20

Table 5  Diameter class-wise classification of tree species (Srivastav et al. 2012)

DC Mi Ai Ds Ah An Tg
0–50 cm 297,512 88,970 285,333 35,435 68,806 671,852
50–100 cm 186,364 10,083 3662 1313 103 0
Total no. of villages 9599 1965 5733 729 1367 13,328
Av. no. of trees/village 145 30 87 11 21 202
Total no. of trees 483,876 99,053 288,995 36,748 68,909 671,852
DC diameter class, M i Mangifera indica, A i Azadirachta indica, D s Dalbergia sissoo, A h
Artocarpus heterophyllus, A n Acacia nilotica, T g Tectona grandis

Table 6  Tree density, biomass and C stock of TOF (Singh and Chand 2012)
TOFs Number of treesa Biomassb C stockb
Linear 40.71 19.34
Road 171–1556 41.59 19.75
Rail 478–557 11.15 21.47
Canal 852–1440 45.21 5.30
Block 447–1200 18.24 8.66
Scattered 7.15 3.40
Urban 170–416 9.53 4.53
Rural 132–336 6.79 3.22
Agroforestry 64–164 6.33 3.10
The figures are number of trees/ha
a

The figures are in tonnes/ha

b
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 337

Fig. 1  Comparison of C stock in different land use systems. (Adopted: Dogra and Chauhan 2016)
Com25 complex agroforestry of 20–40-year rotation, Sim15 simple agroforestry of 15-year rota-
tion, Safeda8 eucalyptus agroforestry of 8-year duration, Poplar8 poplar agroforestry of 8-year
rotation

Table 7  TOF biomass C stock in China (Guo et al. 2014)

Period Woodlands Shrubberies Trees on non-forest land Total
1977–1981 70 (8.5)a 335 (40.7) 418 (50.7) 823
1984–1988 74 (7.7) 350 (36.5) 535 (55.8) 960
1989–1993 69 (6.2) 374 (33.6) 672 (60.3) 1114
1994–1998 108 (9.0) 427 (35.7) 660 (55.2) 1195
1999–2003 97 (7.8) 512 (41.5) 625 (50.7) 1233
2004–2008 83 (6.2) 605 (45.2) 651 (48.6) 1339
1977–2008 12 (2.4) 270 (52.4) 234 (45.3) 516
Figures are expressed in terra grammes (1 Tg = 1012 g)
Figures in parentheses are per cent of total C stock

million tonnes of C were sequestered by farm forestry plantations in Uttar Pradesh

(Dogra and Chauhan 2016). The potential of long-rotation species is higher, yet the
potential of poplar and eucalyptus plantations at short rotation is substantial (Fig. 1).
In China, Guo et al. (2014) reported that total TOF biomass C stock increased by
62.7% from 1977 to 2008 (Table 7).

6 TOF Inventory

TOF needs to be assessed because of its production role and ecological functions
and moreover for sustainable natural resource management (Singh and Chand 2012;
Pujar et  al. 2014). Information about TOF is felt necessary now for monitoring
338 S. Chakravarty et al.

landscapes to formulate mitigation and adaptation strategies (Plieninger 2011;

Schnell 2015) like in international agreements (UNCCD 1994; SCBD 2005;
UNFCCC 2008). TOF inventories nationally will be helpful to design and formulate
policies and legislation for its conservation and use. Locally such inventories will
aid in management for its sustainable utilization and conservation of local forest
(Schnell 2015). TOF inventories will be helpful for managing social, economic and
ecological benefits in tropical countries (Guo et  al. 2014) through planning and
executing large-scale plantations outside forests. As of now, land-cover and land-­
use assessments and national forest inventories in some countries include biophysi-
cal and socioeconomic data of TOFs which can be used for monitoring and
evaluating TOF.
Consequent of FAO’s drive, many countries like India, Sweden, France,
Switzerland, the USA, Great Britain and many more have included TOF in their
National Forest Inventory (NFI) and National Forest Monitoring and Assessment
(NFMA) (Barr and Gillespie 2000; Bélouard and Coulon 2002; Riemann 2003;
Cumming et al. 2008; Brändli 2010; FAO 2012; Lister et al. 2012; de Foresta et al.
2013; Fridman et al. 2014; Tewari et al. 2014; Meena et al. 2017). Including TOF in
the NFIs have clearly accounted huge amount of wood resources that otherwise
remained unaccounted when TOFs were not included in the monitoring systems
(Nowak 2002; Riemann 2003; Cumming et al. 2007; Nowak et al. 2008; Lister et al.
2012; Schnell et al. 2015). It was reported that in India, more than a quarter of grow-
ing stock of trees are from outside forests (Ahmed 2008; Pandey 2008; FSI 2011).
Unfortunately, till date all kinds of TOFs are not included in NFIs and even not
floated in public domain (de Foresta et al. 2013). Forest inventories do not often
include TOF, and involvement of multi-stakeholders across sectors like agricultural,
forest and urban is a major problem for monitoring TOF (Perry et  al. 2009; de
Foresta et  al. 2013). Only two inventory systems, i.e. NFMA of the FAO (FAO
2012) and the Indian NFI (Tewari et al. 2014), monitor all types of TOFs. NFMA
inventory is worked out in a single-phased sampling of few large units distributed
uniformly in the study area (Schnell 2015). In contrast, Indian inventory is worked
out in two-phased sampling with districts as first sampling units and TOFs in second
phase sampling (Tewari et al. 2014).
TOF area covering larger than 1 ha area is captured by the resources survey satel-
lite used for forest-cover assessment in present methodology, and area less than 1 ha
is not (Dogra and Chauhan 2016). Thus, trees included in the tree cover constitute
only a part of TOF, albeit a large part. Remote sensing can also be employed for
TOF monitoring (Baffetta et al. 2011; Gregoire et al. 2011; Lam et al. 2011; Ståhl
et al. 2011; Tewari et al. 2014; Schnell 2015), for example, coarse, medium and high
spatial resolution (Foschi and Smith 1997; Lee and Lathrop 2005; Small and Lu
2006; Thornton et  al. 2006, 2007; Walker and Briggs 2007; Walton 2008; Perry
et al. 2009; Tansey et al. 2009; Fehrmann et al. 2014; Pujar et al. 2014; Schumacher
and Nord-Larsen 2014; Zomer et al. 2014; Dadhich and Meena 2014). These remote
sensing studies found out that traditional forest inventories underestimated in
accounting the tree resources and established that globally in 43% farm land is cov-
ered with more than 10% tree canopy. TOFs are monitored simply with both
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 339

unsupervised and supervised classification methods (Kumar et al. 2008) along with
image-derived metrics for C stocks (Myeong et al. 2006). Some studies also used
manual image interpretation based on only sampling (Hansen 1985; Fensham and
Fairfax 2003; Fehrmann et al. 2014). TOF can remotely be studied on object-based
classification also with 80–90% accuracies as metropolitan regions (Walker and
Briggs 2007; Ouma and Tateishi 2008; Taubenbock et al. 2010), agricultural land-
scapes (Sheeren et al. 2009; Tansey et al. 2009; Liknes et al. 2010), scattered land-
scapes, suburban areas (Zhou and Troy 2008) and savannahs (Boggs 2010). In
addition, active remote sensing technique like ALS was also employed to monitor
TOFs (Rutzinger et al. 2008; Straub et al. 2008; Eysn et al. 2012). LiDAR data was
reported effective to develop models for estimating TOF volume and biomass
(Lefsky and McHale 2008).
TOF biomass and C models were also developed using allometric equations.
These models however were not used very widely (Chave et al. 2005; Zhou et al.
2007, 2014; Nilsson 2008; McHale et al. 2009; Kuyah et al. 2012; Yoon et al. 2013).
It was reported that allometry of trees and specific gravity of wood in the same spe-
cies vary for TOFs and forest trees (Zhou et al. 2011). Specific gravity of TOF is
higher in highly tapered trunk woods with more biomass allocated to crown than
forest trees of same species. Moreover, TOFs are shorter than forest trees of same
species (Harja et al. 2012). This is because these trees are more exposed to solar
radiation, wind and agricultural residuals. Bamboo and palms are included in TOFs
as they contribute substantially to national biomass stock; some crude estimation
methods like Brown (1997) was used (Schnell 2015).

7 Livelihood Importance

Interaction of climate with farming practices and society has developed many tree-­
based farming practices (Gibbon and Schultz 1989; Gilmour and Nurse 1991;
Kharal and Oli 2008; Painkra et al. 2016). Many trees and shrubs with multiuses are
grown or allowed to grow in and around homesteads, farmland and other land uses.
These trees are socially and culturally associated and hence, considered as integral
component of livelihoods especially for rural areas in terms of food, medicines, fod-
der, timber, constructions, domestic energy and source of income along with main-
taining ecological health (Regmi and Garforth 2010; Sayer et al. 2013; Sihag et al.
2015; Painkra et al. 2016). Trees on farmland are an integral part of the farming
system and has the potential to meet the need of growing population by sustaining
crop agriculture and livestock, production of commodities for exchange and as a
form of energy and diverse tree products for sustaining rural livelihoods through
income generation (Chakravarty et al. 2017a, b). Traditional Nepalese alder (Alnus
nepalensis)-based agroforestry system with large cardamom crop is most suitable
and offers comparative advantage over other livelihood options in Sikkim Himalayas
where farmers are earning about one lakh rupees INR/ha/yr which is double remu-
nerative than popular maize-potato cultivation, also providing much needed fodder
340 S. Chakravarty et al.

and fire wood to the households along with other environmental services like
resource conservation (Avasthe et al. 2011; Meena and Yadav 2014).
TOFs satisfy over two-thirds of the domestic energy demand in the Asia-Pacific
countries in form of firewood and charcoal (FAO 2001b). TOFs are also known as
‘trees that nourish’ as poor and landless people derive essential products from
them (Halavatau 1995) and are planted in African and Asian countries for produc-
ing food and other non-wood forest products. In Africa, Asia and Latin America,
these trees are source of savings for the future in terms of their timber value, thus
a sort of piggybank (FAO 2001b; Negreros-Castillo and Mize 2002). In these
countries TOFs satisfy about 80% of the needs of the wood-based industries
(Chave et al. 2004) generating income for the people. Trees and tree-based prod-
ucts provide jobs and products as well (Biswas 2006). Trees contribute towards
sustainable livelihoods of rural poor but also have a special ethical role for Indians
(Pandey 2007). TOFs are also an important source of feed for livestock in tropical
countries, thus ensuring livelihood for the many who are primarily relying on
animal husbandry for their well-being. In the Sudano-Sahelian Africa, three-
fourths of 10,000 TOFs species in agricultural land use satisfies half of the fodder
need of the livestock (FAO 2001b).

8 Problems of Growing TOFs

Many constraints are reported to slow down the growth and development of TOFs
especially the farm and agroforestry to its full potential (Dogra and Chauhan 2016).
These are:

–– Long gestation period and market uncertainties.

–– Not supported by financial institutions and extension services.
–– No regulated markets.
–– Unavailable improved planting material.
–– Limited choice of profitable planting models.
–– No separate laws and regulations for TOFs, guided by Forest Act.
–– No regulated price mechanism.
–– Unfavourable export and import policy.
–– Trees on farm may compete with food crops for space, sunlight, moisture and
nutrient reducing yield and can damage crops during its harvesting.
–– Trees are host to insects and birds.
–– Allelopathic effect by trees (eucalyptus) on crops.
–– Rapid regeneration may take over the entire land like raimuniya (Lantana
camara) and subabul.
–– Labour intensive which may sometime cause scarcity in farm activities.
–– Longer gestation period to realize income.
–– TOFs may compete with crops especially where land is scarce.
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 341

9 Conclusion

TOF can be pivotal for balancing earth’s CO2 by fixing the C in its biomass and miti-
gate climate change. These plantations improve the microclimate and act as a valu-
able vegetation C pool and plant biodiversity centres. There are many species in
TOF which give its inputs in mitigating environmental pollution, checking dust flow
and noise pollution and helping to reduce atmospheric CO2 and provide benefits to
global climate. TOF is a remedial measure and alternative opportunity for control-
ling the present level of atmospheric CO2 through increasing afforestation, prevent-
ing biodiversity loss and maintaining the bio-resources and ecological balance. TOF
can be very helpful to bring back harmony to urban environment by providing eco-
system services. In recognizing the magnitude of the TOF resources, efficient inven-
torying is vital to formulate suitable national policy for its sustainable
management.

10 Recommendations and Future Research

TOFs can efficiently fix atmospheric CO2 in its woody biomass and fulfil the timber
demands but need to be managed and monitored properly for which local, regional
or national inventory is required. TOF is becoming a part of existing national forest
inventory systems. Only the Indian and FAO inventories are including trees growing
in all land uses. However, harmonization in analysing and reporting is still not
advanced like in forestry sector creating difficulties locating the results from TOF
assessments. Efforts are also needed by other countries to include all types of tree in
their national inventories. Specific allometric biomass models need to be formulated
and developed for the TOFs as uncertainties exist while applying forest-specific
models. If forest models are to be used, they should be assessed for adequacy and
validity. Terrestrial laser scanning effectively estimates tree volume without cutting
or uprooting the tree, thus reducing manual work. Remote sensing is an effective
tool in vegetation analysis though remotely sensed data is also an effective method
to monitor and assist field inventories. However, more research is required to study
model-assisted estimation and spatially balanced sampling methods for effective
TOF inventories (Schnell 2015). Reconstruction techniques that verify the applica-
bility of summary statistics for describing TOFs should be efficiently developed to
generate artificial tree populations with varied spatial properties (Schnell 2015).
TOF sampling simulation will use wall-to-wall remotely sensed data like two-phase
sampling strategies.
The depletion of forest resources and increasing demands for forest products
especially by the forest-dependent rural people have widened the gap between
demand and supply in developing countries of the tropical world. This has war-
ranted finding alternative options that will increase the supply of forest products to
support rural livelihoods which now has become a fundamental concern for policy-
makers and planners. TOFs can be a forerunner as an alternative option for rural
livelihoods and biodiversity conservation. Several national government policies
342 S. Chakravarty et al.

which emphasize the need to initiate TOF in form of community and agroforestry
programmes have empowered the NGOs to play a pivotal role in its popularizing for
addressing the livelihood needs of poor households (Chakravarty et al. 2017a, b).
Most of the households in rural tropics are not self-sufficient in food production as
most of them either are landless or small and marginal land holders. The practice of
growing TOFs as agroforestry on these small land holdings or village commons can
serve as a source of food and some cash. Trees on farmland can also contribute
towards the subsistence needs of the households in terms of fuel wood, fodder,
fruits/food and local medicine and sometime hard-earned cash by selling the excess
left after their use. Strengthening of self-help groups especially the women’s sav-
ings groups in parallel with the development of TOFs programme may ensure a
sustainable source of funds for group members’ income-generating activities.
Converting women farmer groups into savings and credit cooperative can represent
the common interests of a larger proportion and can be a means to market TOF
products in an organized way. Such institutions not only increase income but also
strengthen the group capacity to mobilize community resources.
Forests in India cannot fulfil the timber and industrial needs on a sustainable
basis due to insufficient growing stock, poor growth rates, inadequate financial and
technical inputs and serious biotic pressures. The TOFs have to supplement the
demand but need support from institutional research. A way forward lies in improv-
ing productivity of degraded forests and encouraging farm and agroforestry by
encouraging and ensuring more and more TOF plantation through quality planting
material. TOF in general and agroforestry in particular is a viable option for C
sequestration and subsequent C trading, under the clean development mechanism
(CDM). Potential of TOF under CDM can be increased with improved clonal seed-
lings, and area under it can be extended without affecting agricultural production.
Availability of superior planting materials of eucalyptus, gamhar, maharukh and
bakain under TOF in general and agroforestry in particular will substitute pulp-­
producing species, thus making TOF a viable CDM option. In addition, Dogra and
Chauhan (2016) enlisted the following issues which need to be addressed on
priority:

–– Strengthening tree-based and farm forestry research and extension, i.e. increased
support to R&D projects
–– Strengthening extension and financial support system including digital support
–– Nursery registration and certification to facilitate availability of quality planting
stock
–– Formalizing stakeholders
–– Friendly harvest and transit laws and regulations for TOFs
–– Agro-based status to wood-/timber-based cottage industries on value addition

Climate change places new and more challenging demands on maintaining sus-
tainability requiring investments for enhancing research to offset the negative effects
of climate change. Thus, partnerships with other national systems and international
centres along with investment in laboratory scientists and infrastructure are needed.
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 343

Strong extension linkages among the stakeholders is essential for transferring tech-
nology, facilitating interaction, building capacity among farmers and encouraging
farmers to form their own networks. This requires strengthening the global efforts
for collecting and disseminating spatial data on tree resources through remote sens-
ing. Statistical programmes should be also increased and encouraged through fund-
ing. International development agencies and national governments should encourage
and support community participation in plantation programme planning and execu-
tion through technical, financial and capacity-building of local communities.

References
Acharya KP (2006) Linking trees on farms with biodiversity conservation in subsistence farming
systems in Nepal. Biodivers Conserv 15:631–646
Ahmed P (2008) Trees outside forests (TOF): a case study of wood production and consumption
in Haryana. Int For Rev 10:165–172
Ajewole IA (2010) Urban forestry development in Britain and Ireland: lessons for Nigeria. In:
Adeyoyoju SK, Bada SO (eds) Readings in sustainable tropical forest management. Zenith
Book House. pp 1–22
Alexandre DY, Lescure JP, Bied-Charreton M, Fotsing JM (1999) Contribution à l’état des con-
naissancessur les arbres hors forêt (TOF). IRD-FAO, Orléans
Ament R, Begley J (2014) Roadside vegetation and soils on federal lands-evaluated of the potential
for increasing carbon capture and storage and decreasing carbon emissions. Federal Highway
Administration, Vancouver. 38 p
Arnberger A (2012) Urban Densification and recreational quality of public urban green space, a
Viennese case study. Sustainability 4:703–720
Avasthe RK, Singh KK, Tomar JMS (2011) Langer cardamom (Amomum subulatum Roxb.) based
agroforestry systems for production, resources conservation and livelihood security in the
Sikkim Himalayas. Indian J Soil Conserv 39:155–160
Ayensu CRD, Collins M, Dearing A, Fresco L, Gadgil M, Giday H, Glaser G, Juma C, Krebs J,
Lenton R, Lubchenco J, McNeely JA, Mooney HA, Pinstrup-Andersen P, Ramos M, Raven
P, Reid WV, Samper C, Sarukhan J, Schei P, Tundisi JG, Watson RT, Guanhua X, Zakri AH
(1999) International ecosystem assessment. Science 286:685–686
Baffetta F, Corona P, Fattorini L (2011) Assessing the attributes of scattered trees outside the forest
by a multi-phase sampling strategy. Forestry 84:315–325
Baral SK, Malla R, Khanal S, Shakya R (2013) Trees on farms: diversity, carbon pool and contri-
bution to rural livelihoods in Kanchanpur District of Nepal. Banko Janakari 23:3–11
Barr CJ, Gillespie MK (2000) Estimating hedgerow length and pattern characteristics in Great
Britain using Countryside Survey data. J Environ Manage 60:23–32
Baudry J, Bunce RGH, Burel F (2000) Hedgerows: an international perspective on their origin,
function and management. J Environ Manage 60:7–22
Beckett KP, Smith PF, Taylor G (2000) Effective tree species for local air-quality management.
J Arboric 26:12–19
Bellefontaine R, Petit S, Pain-Orcet, M, Deleporte P, Bertault JG (2001) Les arbres hors forêt:
versunemeilleure prise en compte (No. 35). FAO, Rome
Bellefontaine R, Petit S, Pain Orcet M, Deleporte P, Bertault J (2002) Trees outside forests: towards
a better awareness. FAO, Rome. 218 p
Bélouard T, Coulon F (2002) Trees outside forests: France. In: Bellefontaine R, Petit S, Deleporte
P, Bertault J-G (eds) Trees outside forests. Towards better awareness. FAO, Rome, pp 149–156
Berkes F, Kislalioglu M, Folke C, Gadgil M (1998) Exploring the basic ecological unit: ecosystem-­
like concepts in traditional societies. Ecosystems 1:409–415
344 S. Chakravarty et al.

Bhagwat SA, Willis KJ, Birks HJB, Whittaker RJ (2008) Agroforestry: a refuge for tropical biodi-
versity? Trends Ecol Evol 23:261–267
Biswas RK (2006) Trees outside forests: opportunities for socio-economic and cultural develop-
ment. Presented at National Seminar on Trees outside forests: Potential for socio-economic
and ecological development. Department of Forests and Wildlife Preservation, Government of
Punjab, Chandigarh
Boffa JM (2000) West African agroforestry parklands: keys to conservation and sustainable man-
agement. Unasylva 51:11–17
Boggs GS (2010) Assessment of SPOT 5 and Quick Bird remotely sensed imagery for mapping
tree cover in savannas. Int J Appl Earth Observ Geoinf 12:217–224
Bowler DE, Buyung-Ali L, Knight TM, Pullin AS (2010) Urban greening to cool towns and cities:
a systematic review of the empirical evidence. Land Urban Plan 97:147–155
Brändli U-B (2010) Schweizerisches Landesforstinventar. Ergebnisse der dritten Erhebung 2004–
2006. WSL, BAFU, Birmensdorf, Bern
Brown S (1997) Estimating biomass and biomass change of tropical forests: a primer. FAO
Forestry Paper, 137. FAO, Rome
Buchel S, Frantzeskaki N (2015) Citizen voices case study about perceived ecosystem services by
urban park users in Rotterdam the Netherlands. Eco Serv 12:169–177
Buragohain S, Sharma B, Nath JD, Gogaoi N, Meena RS, Lal R (2017) Impact of ten years of bio-­
fertilizer use on soil quality and rice yield on an inceptisol in Assam, India. Soil Res. https://
[Link]/10.1071/SR17001
Canadell JG, Pataki D, Pitelka L (eds.) (2007) Terrestrial ecosystems in a changing world. The
IGBP Series. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg
Carlowitz HC (1713) Sylvicultura oeconomica: Anweisungzurwilden Baum-Zucht. Braun, Leipzig
Chakravarty S, Puri A, Subba M, Pala NA, Shukla G (2017a) Homegardens: drops to sustainabil-
ity. In: Dagar JC, Tewari VP (eds) Agroforestry: anecdotal to modern science. Springer Nature,
Singapore, pp 517–528. [Link]
Chakravarty S, Subba M, Pala NA, Dey T, Shukla G(2017b) Climate change and home gardens:
involving small landholders for mitigation. In: Kumar M, Rajwar GS (eds) Agroforestry:
­practices and potential services. OMICS Group eBooks, Foster City. Available at www.
[Link]/ebooks
Chaudhury P (2006) Valuing recreational benefits of urban forestry – a case study Chandigarh city.
Ph.D. Thesis, FRI (Deemed University), Dehra Dun, India
Chauhan SK, Chauhan R, Saralch HS (2008) Exotics in Indian forestry. In: Chauhan SK, Gill
SS, Sharma SC, Chauhan R (eds) Exotics in Indian forestry. Agrotech Publishing Academy,
Udaipur, pp 24–56
Chavan BL, Rasal GB (2010) Sequestered standing carbon stock in selective tree species grown in
University campus at Aurangabad, Maharashtra, India. Int J Eng Sci Tech 2:3003–3007
Chave J, Condit R, Aguilar S, Hernandez A, Lao S, Perez R (2004) Error propagation and scaling
for tropical forest biomass estimates. Phil Trans R Soc London 359:409–420
Chave J, Andalo C, Brown S, Cairns MA, Chambers JQ, Eamus D, Folster H, Fromard F, Higuchi
N, Kira T, Lescure JP, Nelson BW, Ogawa H, Puig H, Riera B, Yamakura T (2005) Tree allom-
etry and improved estimation of carbon stocks and balance in tropical forests. Oecologia
145:87–99
Chiesura A (2004) The role of urban parks for the sustainable city. Landsc Urban Plan 68:129–138
Cotta MK, Jacovine LAG, Valverde S, Pavia HN, Virgens Filho AC, Silva MA (2006)
Analiseeconomica does consorcioseringueria-cacauparageracao de certificados de emissoesre-
duzidas. Revista Arvore 30:969–979
Cumming AB, Nowak DJ, Twardus D, Hoehn R, Mielke M, Rideout R (2007) National Forest
Health Monitoring Program, Urban Forests of Wisconsin: Pilot Monitoring Project 2002.
USDA, Forest Service, Newton Square
Cumming AB, Twardus DB, Nowak DJ (2008) Urban forest health monitoring: large scale assess-
ments in the United States. Arboric Urban For 34:341–346
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 345

Curlevski NJA, Xu Z, Anderson IC, Cairney JWG (2010) Converting Australian tropical rain-
forest to native Araucariaceae plantations alters soil fungal communities. Soil Biol Biochem
42:14–20
Dadhich RK, Meena RS (2014) Performance of Indian mustard (Brassica juncea L.) in response
to foliar spray of thiourea and thioglycollic acid under different irrigation levels. Indian J Ecol
41(2):376–378
Datta R, Kelkar A, Baraniya D, Molaei A, Moulick A, Meena RS, Formanek P (2017) Enzymatic
degradation of lignin in soil: a review. Sustain MDPI 9:1163. [Link]
su9071163, 1-18
Dawoe E, Asante W, Acheampong E, Bosu P (2016) Shade tree diversity and aboveground car-
bon stocks in Theobroma cacao agroforestry systems: implications for REDD+ implemen-
tation in a West African cacao landscape. Carbon Balance Manage. [Link]
s1321-016-0061
de Foresta H, Somarriba E, Temu A, Boulanger D, Feuilly H, Gauthier M (2013) Towards the
assessment of trees outside forests. FAO Resources Assessment Working Paper No. 183. Rome,
Italy
Dogra AS, Chauhan SK (2016) Trees outside forests in India: socio-economic, environmental and
policy issues. In: Parthiban KT, Seenivasan R (eds) Forest technologies- a complete value chain
approach, vol 1. Scientific Publishers, pp 84–102
Dubal K, Ghorpade P, Dongare M, Patil S (2013) Carbon sequestration in the standing trees at
campus of Shivaji University, Kolhapur. Nat Environ Pollut 12:725–726
Eysn L, Hollaus M, Schadauer K, Pfeifer N (2012) Forest delineation based on airborne LIDAR
Data. Remote Sens 4:762–783
FAO (2001a) Global forest resources assessment 2000. Main report. FAO forestry paper 140. FAO,
Rome
FAO (2001b) Trees outside forests. Conservation Guide No. 35, 210 p
FAO (2005) Tree outside forest. FAO, Rome
FAO (2006) Global forest resources assessment; FAO Forestry towards sustainable forest manage-
ment. FAO Forestry Paper 147. FAO, Rome
FAO (2010) Global forest resources assessment 2010. FAO forestry paper 163. FAO, Rome
FAO (2012) National forest monitoring and assessment – manual for integrated field data collec-
tion. Version 3.0 (NFMA Working Paper, 37/E). FAO, Rome
Fehrmann L, Seidel D, Krause B, Kleinn C (2014) Sampling for landscape elements-a case study
from Lower Saxony, Germany. Environ Monit Assess 186:1421–1430
Fensham RJ, Fairfax RJ (2003) Assessing woody vegetation cover change in north-west Australian
savannah using aerial photography. Int J Wildland Fire 12:359–367
Foschi PG, Smith DK (1997) Detecting subpixel woody vegetation in digital imagery using two
artificial intelligence approaches. Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 63:493–499
Fridman J, Holm S, Nilsson M, Nilsson P, Ringvall A, Ståhl G (2014) Adapting National Forest
Inventories to changing requirements – the case of the Swedish National Forest Inventory at the
turn of the 20th century. Silva Fennica 48:1–29
FSI (2011) India State of Forest Report. Forest Survey of India, Dehra Dun
FSI (2013) Growing stock, India. State of Forest Report. Forest Survey of India, Dehra Dun
Garforth CJ, Malla YB, Neopane RP, Pandit BH (1999) Socioeconomic factors and agroforestry
improvements in the hills of Nepal. Mount Res Dev 19:273–278
Gavali RS, Shaikh HMY (2016) Estimation of carbon storage in the tree growth of Sholapur
Campus University, India. Int J Sci Res NET 5:2364–2367
Gene W, Rey GW, Frederick J, Deneke FJ (1978) Urban forestry. Wiley, New York, 279 p
Gibbon D, Schultz M (1989) Agricultural Systems in the Eastern Hills of Nepal: present situations
and opportunities for innovative research and extension. PAC Technical Paper [Link]
Agricultural Center, Dhankuta, Nepal
Gilmour DA (1997) Rearranging trees in the land scape in the Middle Hills of Nepal. In: Arnold
JEM, Dewees PA (eds) Farms, trees and farmers: responses to agricultural intensification.
Earthscan, London, pp 21–42
346 S. Chakravarty et al.

Gilmour DA, Nurse M (1991) Farmers’ initiatives in increasing tree cover in central Nepal. Mount
Res Dev 11:329–337
Goddard MA, Dougill AJ, Benton TG (2010) Scaling up from gardens: biodiversity conservation
in urban environments. Trends Ecol Evol 25:90–98
GoG (1984) Gujarat wood balance study. Government of Gujarat, Ahmadabad
Grala RK, Tyndall JC, Mize CW (2010) Impact of field windbreaks on visual appearance of agri-
cultural lands. Agrofor Syst 80:411–422
Gregoire TG, Ståhl G, Næsset E, Gobakken T, Nelson R, Holm S (2011) Model-assisted estimation
of biomass in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway. Can J For Res 41:83–95
Guo ZD, Hu HF, Pan YD, Birdsey RA, Fang JY (2014) Increasing biomass carbon stocks in trees
outside forests in China over the last three decades. Biogeoscience 11:4115–4122
Gutzwiller K (ed) (2002) Applying landscape ecology in biological conservation. Springer,
New York
Halavatau S (1995) Agroforestry in the food production systems in the South Pacific. ACIAR Proc.
Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research, Canberra
Hansen MH (1985) Notes: line intersect sampling of wooded strips. For Sci 31:282–288
Harja D, Vincent G, Mulia R, van Noordwijk M (2012) Tree shape plasticity in relation to crown
exposure. Trees 26:1275–1285
Herzog F (2000) The importance of perennial trees for the balance of northern European agricul-
tural landscapes. Unasylva 51:42–48
Houde J (1997) Public property tree preservation. J Arboric 23:83–86
IPCC (2013) Summary for policymakers. In: Stoker TF, Qin D, Planter GK, Tignor M, Allen
SK, Boschung J, Nauels A, Xia Y, Bex V, Midgley PM (eds) Climate change 2013: the physi-
cal science basis. Contribution of working group I to the Fifth assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge, pp 3–32
Janiola MDC, Marin A (2016) Carbon sequestration potential of fruit tree plantations in Southern
Philippines. J Biodivers Environ Sci 8:164–174
Jayanthi P, Rajendra A (2013) Life-Forms of Madukkarai Hills of Southern Western Ghats, Tamil
Nadu India. Life Sci Leaf 9:57–61
Jhariya MK (2017) Vegetation ecology and carbon sequestration potential of shrubs in trop-
ics of Chhattisgarh, India. Environ Monit Assess 189(10):518. [Link]
s10661-017-6246-2
Jhariya MK, Yadav DK (2018) Biomass and carbon storage pattern in natural and plantation for-
est ecosystem of Chhattisgarh, India. J For Environ Sci 34(1):1–11. [Link]
JFES.2018.34.1.1
Jhariya MK, Banerjee A, Yadav DK, Raj A (2018) Leguminous trees an innovative tool for soil
sustainability. In: Meena RS, Das A, Yadav GS, Lal R (eds) Legumes for soil health and sus-
tainable management. Springer, ISBN 978-981-13-0253-4 (eBook), ISBN: 978-981-13-0252-7
(Hardcover). [Link]
Jim CY, Chen WY (2009) Ecosystem services and valuation of urban forests in China. Cities
26:187–194
Kanowski P, McDermott C, Cashore B (2011) Post-Copenhagen strategies for the implementation
of REDD+. In: Richardson K, Steffen W, Liverman D (eds) Climate change: global risks, chal-
lenges and decisions. Cambridge University Press, New York, pp 429–430
Kerckhoffs LHJ, Reid JB (1997) Carbon sequestration in the standing biomass of orchard crops in
New Zealand. New Zealand Institute for Crop and Food Research Ltd, Hasting
Kharal DK, Oli BN (2008) An estimation of tree species diversity in rural farmland of Nepal.
Banko Janakari 18:3–10
Kleinn C (1999) Compilation of information on trees outside the forest. A contribution to the
Forest Resources Assessment 2000 of FAO. Regional Special Study for Latin America. CATIE,
Costa Rica
Kleinn C (2000) On large-area inventory and assessment of trees outside forests. Unasylva 51:3–10
Konijnendijk CC (2003) A decade of urban forestry in Europe. Forest Policy Econ 5:173–186
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 347

Kotwal PC, Bhattacharya P (2000) Extent and status of trees outside forests. Concept paper pre-
sented in the workshop on “Extent and status of trees outside forests” held at IIFM Bhopal
Kuchelmeister G, Braatz S (1993) Urban forestry revisited. Unasylva 44:3–12
Kumar O (2006) Valuation and evaluation of trees outside forest (TOF) in India. Forest Survey of
India, Dehradun
Kumar BM, Nair PKR (2011) Carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry systems: opportunity
and challenges. Springer, Dordrecht/Heidelberg/London. 307 p
Kumar A, Singh K, Lal B, Singh R (2008) Mapping of apple orchards using remote sensing tech-
niques in cold desert of Himachal Pradesh, India. J Ind Soc Remote Sens 36:387–392
Kumar S, Meena RS, Yadav GS, Pandey A (2017) Response of sesame (Sesamum indicum L.) to
sulphur and lime application under soil acidity. Int J Plant Soil Sci 14(4):1–9
Kuyah S, Dietz J, Muthuri C, Jamnadass R, Mwangi P, Coe R, Neufeldt H (2012) Allometric
equations for estimating biomass in agricultural landscapes: I. Aboveground biomass. Agric
Ecosyst Environ 158:216–224
Lam TY, Kleinn C, Coenradie B (2011) Double sampling for stratification for the monitoring of
sparse tree populations: the example of Populus euphratica Oliv. forests at the lower reaches of
Tarim River, Southern Xinjiang, China. Environ Monit Assess 175:45–61
Lasco RD, Lales JS, Arnuevo MT, Guillermo IQ, de Jesus AC, Medrao R, Bajar OF, Menddoza CV
(2002) Carbon dioxide (CO2) storage and sequestration of land cover in the Leyte Geothermal
Reservation. Renew Energy 25:307–315
Leah L, Bremer, Kathleen AF (2010) Does plantation forestry restore biodiversity or create green
deserts? A synthesis of the effects of land-use transitions on plant species richness. Biodivers
Conserv 10:1–23
Lee S, Lathrop RG (2005) Sub-pixel estimation of urban land cover components with linear mix-
ture model analysis and Landsat Thematic Mapper imagery. Int J Remote Sens 26:4885–4905
Lefsky M, McHale MR (2008) Volume estimates of trees with complex architecture from terres-
trial laser scanning. J Appl Remote Sens 2:023521
Lewis SL, Lopez-Gonzalez G, Sonke B, Affum-Baffum-Baffoe K, Baker TR (2009) Increasing
carbon storage in intact African tropical forest. Nature 457:1003–1006
Liknes GC, Perry CH, Meneguzzo DM (2010) Assessing tree cover in agricultural landscapes
using high-resolution aerial imagery. J Terrest Observ 2:38–55
Lister AJ, Scott CT, Rasmussen S (2012) Inventory methods for trees in nonforest areas in the
Great Plains States. Environ Monit Assess 184:2465–2474
Lumsden LF, Bennett AF (2005) Scattered trees in rural landscapes: foraging habitat for insectivo-
rous bats in southeastern Australia. Biol Conserv 122:205–222
Lund HG (2002) When is a forest not a forest? J For 100:21–28
Mandal G, Joshi SP (2014) Biomass accumulation and carbon sequestration potential of Shorea
robusta and Lantana camara from the dry deciduous forests of Doon Valley, western Himalaya,
India. Int J Environ Biol 14:157–169
Manning AD, Gibbons P, Lindenmayer DB (2009) Scattered trees: a complementary strategy
for facilitating adaptive responses to climate change in modified landscapes? J  Appl Ecol
146:915–919
McCullough RB (1999) Four common myths about plantation forestry. New For 17:111–118
McDonnell MJ, Hahs AK, Breuste JH (2009) Ecology of cities and towns: a comparative approach.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
McHale MR, Burke IC, Lefsky MA, Peper PJ, McPherson EG (2009) Urban forest biomass esti-
mates: is it important to use allometric relationships developed specifically for urban trees?
Urban Ecosyst 12:95–113
McPherson EG (1994) Energy-saving potential of trees in Chicago. In: McPherson EG, Nowak
DJ, Rowntree RA (eds) Chicago’s urban forest ecosystem: results of the Chicago urban forest
climate project, General Technical Report NE-186. USDA Forest Service, North eastern Forest
Experiment Station, Radnor, pp 95–113
McPherson EG, Luttinger N (1998) From nature to nature: the history of Sacramento’s urban for-
est. J Arboric 24:72–88
348 S. Chakravarty et al.

Meena RS, Yadav RS (2014) Phonological performance of groundnut varieties under sowing envi-
ronments in hyper arid zone of Rajasthan, India. J Appl Nat Sci 6(2):344–348
Meena RS, Gogaoi N, Kumar S (2017) Alarming issues on agricultural crop production and envi-
ronmental stresses. J Clean Prod 142:3357–3359
Meena H, Meena RS, Lal R, Singh GS, Mitran T, Layek J, Patil SB, Kumar S, Verma T (2018)
Response of sowing dates and bio regulators on yield of clusterbean under current climate in
alley cropping system in eastern U.P. Indian Legum Res 41(4):563–571
Mitchell R, Popham F (2008) Affect of exposure to natural environment on health inequalities an
observational population study. Lancet 372:1655–1660
Myeong S, Nowak DJ, Duggin MJ (2006) A temporal analysis of urban forest carbon storage using
remote sensing. Remote Sens Environ 101:277–282
Nair PKR (2012) Carbon sequestration studies in agroforestry systems: a reality-check. Agrofor
Syst 86:243–253
Negreros-Castillo P, Mize CW (2002) Enrichment planting and the sustainable harvest of mahog-
any (Swietenia macrophylla K) in Quintana Roo, Mexico. In: Figueroa J, Lugo A (eds) Big-leaf
mahogany: genetics, ecology and management. Springer, New York/London
Nilsson S (2008) The Indian forestry system at a crossroads: an outsider’s view. Int For Rev
10:414–421
Norgrove L, Hauser S (2013) Carbon stocks in shaded Theobroma cacao farms and adjacent sec-
ondary forests of similar age in Cameroon. Trop Ecol 54:15–22
Nowak DJ (2002) Carbon storage and sequestration by urban trees in the USA. Environ Pollut
116:381–389
Nowak DJ, Crane DE, Stevens JC, Hoehn RE, Walton JT, Bond J (2008) A ground-based method
of assessing urban forest structure and ecosystem services. Arbori Urban For 34:347–358
Nowak DJ, Hirabayashib S, Doylec M, McGovernc M, Pasher J (2018) Air pollution removal by
urban forests in Canada and its effect on air quality and human health. Urban For Urban Green
29:40–48
Oke D, Olatiilu A (2011) Carbon storage in agro ecosystems: a case study of the cocoa based agro
forestry in Ogbese forest reserve, Ekiti State, Nigeria. J Environ Prot 2:1069–1075
Oleyar MD, Greve AI, Withey JC, Bjorn AM (2008) An integrated approach to evaluating urban
forest functionality. Urban Econ 11:289–308
Ouma YO, Tateishi R (2008) Urban-trees extraction from Quick bird imagery using multiscale
espectex-filtering and non-parametric classification. ISPRS J Photo Remot Sens 63:333–351
Padalia H, Chauhan N, Porwal MC, Roy PS (2014) Phytosociological observations on tree species
diversity of Andaman Islands, India. Curr Sci 87:799–806
Painkra GP, Bhagat PK, Jhariya MK, Yadav DK (2016) Beekeeping for poverty alleviation and
livelihood security in Chhattisgarh, India. In: Narain S, Rawat SK (eds) Innovative technol-
ogy for sustainable agriculture development. Biotech Books, New Delhi, pp 429–453. ISBN:
978-81-7622-375-1
Pain-Orcet M, Bellefontaine R (2004) Trees outside the forest: a new perspective on the man-
agement of forest resources in the tropics. In: Babin D (ed) Beyond tropical deforestation.
UNESCO/CIRAD, Paris, pp 423–430
Paletto A, Chincarini M (2012) Heterogeneity of linear forest formations: differing potential for
biodiversity conservation. A case study in Italy. Agrofor Syst 86:83–93
Pandey DN (2007) Multifunctional agroforestry systems in India. Curr Sci 92:455–461
Pandey D (2008) Trees outside the forest (TOF) resources in India. Int For Rev 10:125–133
Pandey SS, Cockfield G, Maraseni TN (2014) Carbon stock dynamics in different vegetation
dominated community forests under REDD+: a case from Nepal. For Ecol Manage 32:40–47
Pandit BH, Shrestha KK, Bhattarai SS (2014) Sustainable local livelihoods through enhancing
agroforestry systems in Nepal. J For Livelihood 12:47–63
Perry CH, Woodall CW, Liknes GC, Schoeneberger MM (2009) Filling the gap: improving esti-
mates of working tree resources in agricultural landscapes. Agrofor Syst 75:91–101
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 349

Plieninger T (2011) Capitalizing on the carbon sequestration potential of agroforestry in Germany’s

agricultural landscapes: realigning the climate change mitigation and landscape conservation
agendas. Land Res 36:435–454
Plieninger T, Pulido FJ, Schaich H (2004) Effects of land-use and landscape structure on holm
oak recruitment and regeneration at farm level in Quercus ilex L. dehesas. J  Arid Environ
57:345–364
Prasad R, Kotwal PC, Pandey DN (2000) Trees outside forests in India: a national assessment
(Mimeographed). IIFM Bhopal
Pujar GS, Reddy PM, Reddy CS, Jha CS, Dadhwal VK (2014) Estimation of trees outside forests
using IRS high resolution data by object based image analysis. The International Archives of
the Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial Information Sciences, Volume [Link]
Technical Commission VIII Symposium, 9–12 December, Hyderabad, India
Pushpangadan P, Ravi K, Santosh V (1997) Conservation and economic evaluation of biodiversity.
Vols. I–II. IBH Publishing Co. Pvt. Ltd., Oxford/New Delhi
Rahman MM, Kabiir EM, Jahir Uddin Akon ASM, Ando K (2015) High carbon stocks in roadside
plantations under participatory management in Bangladesh. Glob Ecol Conserv 3:412–423
Raj A, Jhariya MK, Harne SS (2018a) Threats to biodiversity and conservation strategies. In: Sood
KK, Mahajan V (eds) Forests, climate change and biodiversity. Kalyani Publisher, New Delhi,
pp 304–320. Pp. 381
Raj A, Jhariya MK, Bargali SS (2018b) Climate smart agriculture and carbon sequestration. In:
Pandey CB, Gaur MK, Goyal RK (eds) Climate change and agroforestry: adaptation mitigation
and livelihood security. New India Publishing Agency (NIPA), New Delhi, pp  1–19. ISBN:
9789-386546067
Rajendra A, Aravindhan V, Sarvalingam A (2014) Biodiversity of the Bharathiar university cam-
pus, India, India: A floristic approach. Int J Biodivers Conserv 6:308–319
Ranasinghe CS, Silva LRS (2007) Photosynthetic assimilation carbohydrates in vegetative organs
and carbon removal in nut-producing and sap-producing coconut palms. COCOS 18:45–57
Ranasinghe CS, Thimothias KSH (2012) Estimation on carbon sequestration potential in coco-
nut plantations under different agro-ecological and land suitability classes. J Nat Sci Found
40:77–93
Ranjan A, Khawas SK, Mishra PK (2016) Carbon sequestration efficacy of trees of Vinoba Bhave
University Campus, Hazaribah. J Multidiscip Eng Sci Technol 3:4688–4692
Rawat JK, Dasgupta SS, Kumar RS (2004) Assessment of tree outside forest based on remote sens-
ing satellite data. Forest Survey of India, Dehra Dun
Regmi BN (1998) Program dynamics of the Nepal Agroforestry Foundation in Majhitar of Dhading
District, Nepal. Unpublished [Link]. Thesis. Graduate School, Department of Social Forestry,
University of the Philippines Los Baños, Philippines
Regmi BN, Garforth C (2010) Trees outside forests and rural livelihoods: a study of Chitwan
District, Nepal. Agrofor Syst 79:393–407
Riemann R (2003) Pilot inventory of FIA plots traditionally called “Nonforest”. USDA, Forest
Service, Newton Square
Roshetko JM, Lasco RD, Angeles MD (2007) Small holder agroforestry systems for carbon stor-
age. Mitig Adapt Strat Glob Chang 12:219–242
Rowntree RA, Nowak DJ (1991) Quantifying the role of urban forest in removing atmospheric
carbon dioxide. J Arboric 17:269–275
Rutzinger M, Höfle B, Hollaus M, Pfeifer N (2008) Object-based point cloud analysis of full-­
waveform airborne laser scanning data for urban vegetation classification. Sensors 8:4505–4528
Rydberg D, Falck J (2000) Urban forestry in Sweden from a silvicultural perspective: a review.
Land Urban Plan 47:1–18
Sayer J, Sunderland T, Ghazou IJ, Pfund J, Sheil D, Meijaard E, Venter M, Boedhihartono A, Day
M, Garcia C, Oosten C, Buck LE (2013) Ten principles for a landscape approach to reconciling
agriculture, conservation, and other competing land uses. PNAS 110:8349–8356
SCBD (2005) Handbook of the convention on biological diversity including its Cartagena Protocol
on biosafety, 3rd edn. CBD, UNEP, Montreal
350 S. Chakravarty et al.

Schnell S (2015) Integrating trees outside forests into national forest inventories. Doctoral thesis.
Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Umeå. SLU Service/Repro, Uppsala. 74 p
Schnell S, Altrell D, Ståhl G, Kleinn C (2015) The contribution of trees outside forests to national
tree biomass and carbon stocks-a comparative study across three continents. Environ Monit
Assess 187:4197
Schoeneberger MM (2009) Agroforestry: working trees for sequestering carbon on agricultural
lands. Agrofor Syst 75:27–37
Schroeder P (1994) Carbon storage benefits of agroforestry system. Agrofor Syst 27:89–97
Schumacher J, Nord-Larsen T (2014) Wall-to-wall tree type classification using airborne lidar data
and CIR images. Int J Remote Sens 35:3057–3073
Sekikawa S, Koizumi H, Kibe T (2002) Diurnal and seasonal changes in soil respiration in a
Japanese grape vine orchard and their dependence on temperature and rainfall. J Jpn Agric Syst
Soc 18:44–54
Sharma R, Ekka A (2016) Diversity of medicinal plants in Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University
campus, Raipur, Chhattisgarh, India. Eur J Pharma Medic Res 3:383–397
Sheeren D, Bastin N, Ouin A, Ladet S, Balent G, Lacombe J-P (2009) Discriminating small
wooded elements in rural landscape from aerial photography: a hybrid pixel/object-based anal-
ysis approach. Int J Remote Sens 30:4979–4990
Shwartz A, Turbe A, Julliard R, Simon L, Prevot TC (2014) Outstanding challenges for urban
conservation research and action. Glob Environ Chang 28:39–49
Sihag SK, Singh MK, Meena RS, Naga S, Bahadur SR, Gaurav YRS (2015) Influences of spacing
on growth and yield potential of dry direct seeded rice (Oryza sativa L.) cultivars. Ecoscan
9(1-2):517–519
Singh K, Chand P (2012) Above-ground tree outside forest (TOF) phytomass and carbon estima-
tion in the semi-arid region of southern Haryana: a synthesis approach of remote sensing and
field data. J Earth Syst Sci 121:1469–1482
Singh P, Lodhiyal LS (2009) Biomass and carbon allocation in 8-year-old poplar (Populus deltoids
Marsh) plantation in Terai agroforestry system of Central Himalaya, India. N Y Sci J 2:49–53
Singh K, Singh G (2015) Roadside vegetation diversity of Jodhpur district and its role in carbon
sequestration and climate change mitigation. Adv For Sci 2:23–33
Singh SP, Sah PP, Tyagi V, Jina BS (2005) Species diversity contributes to productivity– Evidence
from natural grassland communities of the Himalaya. Curr Sci 89:548–552
Singh A, Balodi KN, Naithani S, Srivastava A, Singh A, Kwon-Ndung E (2017) Vascular plant
diversity with special reference to invasion of alien species on the Doon University Campus,
Dehradun, India. Int J Biodivers Conserv 9:56–76
Small C, Lu JWT (2006) Estimation and vicarious validation of urban vegetation abundance by
spectral mixture analysis. Remote Sens Environ 100:441–456
Sofo A, Nuzzo V, Palese AM, Xiloyannis C, Celano G (2005) Net CO2 storage in Mediterranean
olive and peach orchards. Sci Hortic 107:17–24
Sonwa DJ, Weise SF, Nkongmeneck BA, Tchatat M, Janssens MJJ (2009) Carbon stock in small-
holder chocolate forest in Southern Cameroon and potential role in climate change mitigation.
IOP Conf Ser Earth Environ Sci 6:252–308
Srinidhi HV, Datta SK, Chauhan R, Gill MK (2007) Dendroremediation: use of trees to cleanup
environment in different land use systems. Environ Ecol 25:245–254
Srivastav A, Pandey AK, Dubey R (2012) Assessment of important tree outside forests (TOF) in
Gorakhpur district of Uttar Pradesh. Indian Forester 138:252–256
Ståhl G, Holm S, Gregoire TG, Gobakken T, Naesset E, Nelson R (2011) Model-based inference
for biomass estimation in a LiDAR sample survey in Hedmark County, Norway. Can J For Res
41:96–107
Straub C, Weinacker H, Koch B (2008) A fully automated procedure for delineation and clas-
sification of forest and non-forest vegetation based on full waveform laser scanner data. In:
Chen J, Jiang J, Peled A (eds) ISPRS Archives – Volume XXXVII Part B8. ISPRS, Beijing,
pp 1013–1020
Ecosystem Services of Trees Outside Forest 351

Suryawanshi MN, Patel AR, Kale TS, Patil PR (2014) Carbon sequestration potential of tree spe-
cies in the environment of North Maharashtra University Campus, Jalgaon (MS) India. Biosci
Discov 5:175–179
Tamang B (2018) Diversity and biomass of woody perennials in Pundibari Campus of Uttar Banga
Krishi Viswavidyalaya, Cooch Behar (W.B.). [Link]. Thesis. Unpublished
Tansey K, Chambers I, Anstee A, Denniss A, Lamb A (2009) Object-oriented classification of very
high resolution airborne imagery for the extraction of hedgerows and field margin cover in
agricultural areas. Appl Geogr 29:145–157
Taubenbock H, Esch T, Wurm M, Roth A, Dech S (2010) Object-based feature extraction using
high spatial resolution satellite data of urban areas. J Spat Sci 55:117–132
ter Steege H, Pitman NC, Sabatier D, Baraloto C, Salomão RP, Guevara JE, Monteagudo A (2013)
Hyperdominance in the Amazonian tree flora. Science 342:1243–1292
Tewari VP, Sukumar R, Kumar R, Gadow K (2014) Forest observational studies in India: past
developments and considerations for the future. For Ecol Manage 316:32–46
Thangata PH, Hildebrand PE (2012) Carbon stock and sequestration potential of agroforestry sys-
tems in smallholder agro ecosystems of sub-Saharan Africa: Mechanisms for reducing emis-
sions from deforestation and forest degradation (REDD+). Agric Ecosyst Environ 158:172–183
Thankappan SSB, James EJ, Solomon J (2015) Vascular Plants Scott Christian College, Nagercoil,
Tamil Nadu, India. Sci Res Rep 5:36–66
Thompson I, Mackey B, McNulty S, Mosseler A (2009) Forest resilience, biodiversity, and climate
change. A synthesis of the biodiversity/resilience/stability relationship in forest ecosystems.
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity, Montreal. Technical Series 43, pp 67–68
Thornton MW, Atkinson PM, Holland DA (2006) Sub-pixel mapping of rural land cover objects
from fine spatial resolution satellite sensor imagery using super-resolution pixel-swapping. Int
J Remote Sens 27:473–491
Thornton MW, Atkinson PM, Holland DA (2007) A linearised pixel-swapping method for map-
ping rural linear land cover features from fine spatial resolution remotely sensed imagery.
Comput Geosci 33:1261–1272
Tiwari P, Soni I, Patel S (2014) Study of vegetation in Pt. Ravishankar Shukla University cam-
pus management, Raipur Chhattisgarh with special reference to statistics. Indian J  Sci Res
4:121–126
Tyrvainen L, Pauleit S, Seeland K, de Vries S (2005) Benefits and uses of urban forests and trees.
In: Konijnendijk CC, Nilsson K, Randrup TB (eds) Urban forests and trees: a reference book.
Springer, Berlin, pp 81–114
UNCCD (1994) United Nations convention to combat desertification. UN, New York
UNFCCC (2008) Kyoto protocol reference manual. UNFCCC, Bonn
Varma D, Meena RS, Kumar S, Kumar E (2017) Response of mungbean to NPK and lime under
the conditions of Vindhyan Region of Uttar Pradesh. Legum Res 40(3):542–545
Verma RK (2000) Analysis of species diversity and soil quality under Tectona grandis (L. f.) and
Acacia catechu (L. f.) Wild plantations raised on degraded bhata land. Indian J Ecol 27:97–108
Walker JS, Briggs JM (2007) An object-oriented approach to urban forest mapping in Phoenix.
Photogramm Eng Remote Sens 73:577–583
Walton JT (2008) Difficulties with estimating city-wide urban forest cover change from national,
remotely-sensed tree canopy maps. Urban Ecosyst 11:81–90
Wolf KL (2005) Business district streetscapes, trees and consumer response. J For 103:396–400
Wolf KL (2007) City trees and property values. Arborist News, August 2007
Yadav GS, Babu S, Meena RS, Debnath C, Saha P, Debbaram C, Datta M (2017a) Effects of
godawariphosgold and single supper phosphate on groundnut (Arachis hypogaea) produc-
tivity, phosphorus uptake, phosphorus use efficiency and economics. Indian J  Agric Sci
87(9):1165–1169
Yadav RP, Bisht JK, Bhatt JC (2017b) Biomass, carbon stock under different production systems
in the mid hills of Indian Himalaya. Trop Ecol 58:15–21
Yadava Y, Chhetri BBK, Raymajhi S, Tiwari KR, Sitaula BK (2017) Importance of trees outside
forest (TOF) in Nepal: a review. Octa J Environ Res 5:70–81
 352 S. Chakravarty et al.

Yoon TK, Park CW, Lee SJ, Ko S, Kim KN, Son Y, Lee KH, Oh S, Lee WK, Son Y (2013)
Allometric equations for estimating the aboveground volume of five common urban street tree
species in Daegu, Korea. Urban For Urban Green 12:344–349
Zhang Y, Duan B, Xian J, Korpelainen H, Li C (2011) Links between plant diversity. Carbon
stocks and environmental factors along a successional gradient in a subalpine coniferous for-
est in Southwest China. For Ecol Manage 262:361–369
Zhou W, Troy A (2008)An object-oriented approach for analysing and characterizing urban land-
scape at the parcel level Int J Remote Sens 29:3119-3135
Zhou XH, Brandle JR, Schoeneberger MM, Awada T (2007) Developing above-ground woody
biomass equations for open-grown, multiple-stemmed tree species: Shelterbelt-grown Russian-­
olive. Ecol Model 202:311–323
Zhou X, Brandle JR, Awada TN, Schoeneberger MM, Martin DL, Xin Y, Tang Z (2011) The use
of forest-derived specific gravity for the conversion of volume to biomass for open-grown trees
on agricultural land. Biomass Bioenergy 35:1721–1731
Zhou X, Schoeneberger MM, Brandle JR, Awada TN, Chu J, Martin DL, Li J, Li Y, Mize CW
(2014) Analyzing the uncertainties in use of forest-derived biomass equations for open-grown
trees in agricultural land. For Sci 61:144–161
Zomer RJ, Coe R, Place F, van Noordwijk M, Xu JC (2014) Trees on farms: an update and reanal-
ysis of agroforestry’s global extent and socio-ecological characteristics. World Agroforestry
Centre (ICRAF) Southeast Asian Regional Program, Bogor

View publication stats