- Topics
- Feature
- Opportunities & Events
- About
- Hindi Portal
- Data
- Topics
- Feature
- Opportunities & Events
- About
- Hindi Portal
- Data
As India’s rivers buckle under the pressure of unchecked sand mining, urban sprawl, and a changing climate, one ancient practice is quietly emerging as a modern remedy: agroforestry. Along the fragile banks of the Lilagar River in Chhattisgarh, a detailed study has shown that planting the right trees in the right places could be the key to restoring not just farmland but the rivers themselves.
Published in the July 2025 edition of Green Technologies and Sustainability, a detailed study by Arun Kumar Shukla and colleagues makes a compelling case that riverine agroforestry, the integration of trees into agricultural land along rivers, can simultaneously revive biodiversity, stabilise soil, and recharge groundwater, all while boosting farmer income.
This is the story of a symbiotic relationship between farmers, forests, and a river under stress.
A river under siege
The Lilagar River, a 135-kilometre-long tributary of the Sheonath River, flows through the Bilaspur and Janjgir-Champa districts of Chhattisgarh. It has long served as a lifeline for agriculture and human settlements in the region. But over the past few decades, increasing anthropogenic pressures, particularly sand mining and land-use change, have degraded its catchment and compromised its year-round flow.
In this context, the researchers set out to study the role of agroforestry, a system where trees are grown alongside crops and livestock, in maintaining biodiversity and sustaining riverine ecosystems. By comparing tree diversity, structure, and composition between riverine agroforestry systems and adjacent natural forests, the study offers insights into the ecological strengths and limitations of both.
Mapping tree diversity along the Lilagar
Ten grid points were identified at 10-kilometre intervals along a 100-kilometre stretch of the Lilagar River. In each grid, four one-hectare sample plots were established, totalling 40 plots in riverine agroforestry zones. These were compared with nine similar plots in the Khondra Reserve Forest.
The results were surprising: riverine agroforestry lands supported 37 different tree species—more than the 28 recorded in the natural forest. At first glance, this suggests that agroforestry may harbour greater tree species richness. Yet, when it comes to ecological balance and diversity indices, natural forests still hold the upper hand.
In terms of tree density, natural forests dwarf agroforestry lands: 419.11 trees per hectare compared to 86.25. According to the Shannon Diversity Index, a key measure of species richness and evenness in ecology and other fields to quantify the diversity of a community, it was 2.388 for natural forests, compared to 1.698 for agroforestry plots. Similarly, natural forests scored higher on Simpson’s Index (0.867 vs. 0.702), indicating a more even and balanced distribution of species.
Why farmers plant what they plant
Tree selection in agroforestry is rarely random. Farmers tend to prefer species that offer quick economic returns, require low maintenance, and support other crop or livestock functions. The dominant species in riverine agroforestry were Terminalia arjuna, Butea monosperma, and Acacia nilotica—all known for their timber, nitrogen-fixing ability, or use in traditional medicine.
These choices make ecological as well as economic sense. For instance, T. arjuna has an extensive root system that stabilises riverbanks and enhances groundwater recharge, while A. nilotica improves soil fertility through nitrogen fixation. B. monosperma, meanwhile, is a host plant for lac insects, offering farmers a supplementary source of income.
This mix of ecology and economy makes agroforestry a compelling option for farmers, especially in semi-arid and riverine zones. But the practice also involves regular pruning, selective harvesting, and careful spacing—factors that can limit diversity by promoting only certain commercially valuable species.
Natural forests: Denser but more vulnerable?
In contrast, the Khondra Reserve Forest revealed a high-density, high-diversity ecosystem dominated by species like Cleistanthus collinus, Tectona grandis, and Shorea robusta. These forests operate under strict protection, with no tree felling allowed, allowing for older, larger trees and greater vertical canopy stratification.
Yet this also means that natural forests may not always be resilient to sudden environmental or economic shocks. With limited human management, such forests are vulnerable to invasive species, fire, and climate stress if not actively monitored.
Interestingly, the study found that 14 species present in the natural forest were absent from the agroforestry plots, while 23 species in agroforestry systems did not appear in the forest. This mutual exclusivity underscores the potential for agroforestry to act as a complementary—not competing—strategy for biodiversity conservation.
Beyond biodiversity: Rejuvenating the river
One of the most compelling reasons to promote riverine agroforestry is its quiet but powerful impact on river health. Trees planted along riverbanks act as natural guards—they prevent soil erosion, slow down surface runoff, and help rainwater seep into the ground. This improves groundwater recharge, which is crucial for keeping rivers flowing during dry months.
As the researchers note, “Agroforestry is essential for maintaining biodiversity and climate-resilient farming as well as maintaining river flow.” These green belts also filter out farm pollutants, leading to cleaner water downstream and healthier ecosystems.
What’s more, agroforestry plays a vital role in storing carbon. With India aiming to meet ambitious climate targets, planting more trees on farmland offers a practical way to support both climate action and river conservation.
The family tree: Fabaceae dominates
The botanical composition of riverine agroforestry systems was heavily skewed towards the Fabaceae family (including Mimosaceae, Caesalpiniaceae, and Papilionaceae), which accounted for 35% of all species recorded. These trees, such as Albizia, Acacia, and Dalbergia, are valued not only for their nitrogen-fixing ability but also for their adaptability, fast growth, and utility in fodder, fuel, and timber.
This dominance is ecologically advantageous. Fabaceae species often use explosive seed dispersal mechanisms, and their seeds are easily carried by wind or water, enabling natural regeneration even with minimal farmer intervention.
In contrast, the natural forest was richer in species from the Combretaceae and Anacardiaceae families, indicating different ecological niches and microclimates.
A mixed bag for diversity
While agroforestry supports a greater number of species overall, it lags behind in diversity indices like evenness, equitability, and dominance. The Simpson dominance value in agroforestry (0.298) was notably higher than in natural forests (0.1327), meaning a few species dominate in the agroforestry system, potentially crowding out others. Yet, as the authors rightly point out, this does not undermine the ecological value of agroforestry. Instead, it highlights the need for more strategic planning in species selection and spacing to avoid monocultures.
What this means for policy
This study has major takeaways for both state and national policy. It clearly shows that agroforestry isn’t just a farming method—it’s a powerful tool for restoring entire landscapes. With the right support and incentives, farmers can take the lead in protecting biodiversity, all while sustaining their own livelihoods.
The researchers strongly recommend making agroforestry a central part of river and ecosystem conservation plans. This includes weaving it into existing efforts like the Namami Gange programme and catchment development schemes under the Jal Shakti Abhiyan. They also urge policymakers to recognise agroforestry in India’s climate goals, such as the Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) and state climate action plans.
More than anything, this research is both a warning and a way forward. It reminds us that rivers aren’t just water bodies—they’re part of a living system that connects forests, farms, and people. Thoughtfully planted trees can rebuild soils, recharge rivers, and renew hope.
In a time of climate chaos, water scarcity, and vanishing biodiversity, riverine agroforestry offers a rare solution that makes both economic and ecological sense. The message is clear: nurture the roots, and the rivers will flow.