Agroforestry has potential for strengthening the climate change resilience of smallholder farmers in Southeast Asia. In Indonesia, the food security challenges faced by smallholders will likely worsen due to climate change impacts. Agroforestry provides and option for strengthening climate change resilience, while contributing to food access, income, health, and environmental stability. To evaluate the evidence for such benefits, this systematic review identifies 22 peer-reviewed articles published between 2000 and 2019 which assess agroforestry’s contributions to food security in Indonesia, mostly in Java or Sumatra. Analysis of the studies indicate that traditional and commercial agroforestry contribute to food security in diverse ways: for example, traditional homegardens offer 20% more dietary diversity than commercial counterparts, while commercial homegardens may contribute up to five times more income. Agri-silviculture contributions fall along a timber versus non-timber forest product continuum that displays a similar tradeoff between diversity and income. Those systems with a commercial focus may receive 54% of their income from a single commodity crop such as coffee, while traditional systems allow greater access to plants with medicinal benefits. Nearly all agroforestry systems offered indirect benefits for food security, such as allowing more off-farm work than traditional agriculture and contributing to environmental stability: users of agroforestry were found by one study to collect 83% less fuelwood from natural forests. One study highlighted that agroforestry options have up to 98% greater net present value (for periods over 30 years) compared to slash and burn style agriculture. However, very few studies of Indonesian agroforestry focused explicitly on financial analysis and food security, indicating the need for further research. Given the similar situations faced by many Southeast Asia countries, our findings contribute to emerging trends throughout the region regarding the relationship between agroforestry and food security.

Land use and land cover (LULC) change causes biodiversity decline through loss, alteration, and fragmentation of habitats. There are uncertainties on how LULC will change in the future and the effect of such change on biodiversity. In this paper we applied the Land Change Modeler (LCM) and Integrated Valuation of Ecosystem Services and Tradeoffs (InVEST) Scenario Generator tool to develop three spatially explicit LULC future scenarios from 2015 to 2030 in the Pulang Pisau district of Central Kalimantan, Indonesia. The district is experiencing a rapid loss of biodiversity as a result of unprecedented LULC changes. Further, we used the InVEST Habitat Quality model to map habitat quality as a proxy to biodiversity in each of the scenarios. We find habitat quality decline is largest in a scenario where past trends of LULC change continue, followed by a scenario with planned agricultural expansion. Alternately, a conservation-oriented scenario results in significant improvements in habitat quality for biodiversity. This information can support in developing appropriate land use policy for biodiversity conservation in Indonesia.

Swidden cultivation can contribute to deforestation and land degradation, which can subsequently result in a number of serious environmental problems. This paper examines the economic and social potential of agroforestry systems and the barriers to their widespread adoption, as a land use alternative to swidden cultivation, which may potentially help protect local forest. The Gunung Salak valley in West Java, Indonesia is presented as a case study. Based on farmers’ and experts’ assessment, costs and benefits have been estimated, which show that the two investigated agroforestry systems have higher net present value and benefit-cost ratio (B/C) than the two swidden cultivation systems. Tree ownership also creates more permanent rights to farmland and is prestigious in the community. Agroforestry products (fruit, vegetables etc.) have high monetary value and help strengthen social cohesion when shared with neighbors. However, farmers are reluctant to implement agroforestry. Stated reasons are related to both culture and capacity. Farmers practicing agroforestry are less involved in forest clearing and forest products collection than swidden farmers indicating that it may contribute positively to conservation of local forests. Increasing the adoption of agroforestry farming in the study area will require support to overcome capacity constraints.

When restoring degraded landscapes, approaches capable of striking a balance between improving environmental services and enhancing human wellbeing need to be considered. Agroforestry is an important option for restoring degraded land and associated ecosystem functions. Using survey, key informant interview and rapid carbon stock appraisal (RaCSA) methods, this study was conducted in five districts in West Java province to examine potential carbon stock in agroforestry systems practiced by smallholder farmers on degraded landscapes. Six agroforestry systems with differing carbon stocks were identified: gmelina (Gmelina arborea Roxb.) + cardamom (Amomum compactum); manglid (Magnolia champaca (L.) Baill. ex Pierre) + cardamom; caddam (Neolamarckiacadamba (Roxb.) Bosser) + cardamom; caddam + elephant grass (Pennisetum purpureum Schumach.); mixed-tree + fishpond; and mixed-tree lots. Compared to other systems, mixed-tree lots had the highest carbon stock at 108.9 Mg ha⁻¹. Carbon stock variations related to species density and diversity. Farmers from research sites said these systems also prevent soil erosion and help to restore degraded land. Farmers’ adoption of agroforestry can be enhanced by the implementation of supportive policies and measures, backed by scientific research.

In Indonesia, smallholders have historically practiced agroforestry, which warrants examination in terms of food and livelihood security within sustainable community forest frameworks. Based on a literature review, we analyzed these two forms of security related to smallholder agroforestry practices. Findings indicate diverse agroforestry systems, with 88% focusing on non-timber forest products (NTFPs) and 12% on timber. While 42% prioritize direct food supply, 58% emphasize income generation through product sales. However, agroforestry that does not produce food for direct consumption by smallholders generates revenue for purchasing food necessities. Agroforestry supports both food needs (46–61%) and income (51–54%) for smallholders, surpassing traditional agriculture (13%). Semi-commercial agroforestry (57%) is a predominant livelihood prospect. The remaining 27% are purely subsistence, and 15% are purely commercial. However, the commercialization of agroforestry that focuses only on high-value commodities results in a negative impact on biodiversity. There is a concomitant decrease in environmental services for climate change mitigation and adaptation. Biodiversity remains crucial for climate resilience, health care, and food security in rural communities. Semi-commercial agroforestry is a midpoint for achieving multifunctional agriculture (biodiversity, soil and water conservation, food security, and income) in the climate change era. The research directly related to food security and ecosystem services quantification remains limited, necessitating further investigation. Policy support and incentives are essential for smallholders practicing complex agroforestry for climate adaptation and mitigation.