The Role of Agroforestry in Achieving Net Zero Agriculture: A Review

Abstract

Agroforestry has re-emerged as a strategically important land-use approach within debates on net zero agriculture because it links climate-change mitigation with adaptation, farm resilience, biodiversity recovery and rural livelihoods. Unlike narrowly technical mitigation options that mainly target one emission source, agroforestry changes the structure and functioning of agricultural landscapes by integrating woody perennials with crops, livestock, or both. This review examines how that integration can contribute to net zero pathways through above-ground and below-ground carbon storage, improved nutrient and water cycling, microclimate regulation, lower emissions intensity of production, and greater whole-farm resilience under climatic stress. It also evaluates why agroforestry should not be treated as a universal substitute for all other decarbonisation strategies. Its mitigation performance is highly context dependent, shaped by baseline land use, species composition, management, tenure, labour availability, market access and policy support. Drawing on literature published mainly from 2000 to March 2026, the review synthesises evidence from silvoarable systems, silvopastoral systems, homegardens, shelterbelts, riparian buffers and other tree-based agricultural mosaics. The evidence indicates that agroforestry can make distinctive contributions to net zero agriculture in at least five ways. First, it increases carbon stocks in biomass and, in many conversions from treeless cropland or degraded pasture, in soils as well. Second, it can improve productivity stability by moderating heat, moisture and wind stress, thereby lowering the risk that mitigation gains are offset by climate-related production losses. Third, it supports biodiversity and ecosystem services that underpin longer-term agricultural sustainability. Fourth, in livestock systems, well-designed silvopasture can improve animal welfare, forage performance and, in some cases, reduce enteric methane intensity per unit of product. Fifth, it diversifies farm outputs and risk management options, which is crucial for durable adoption. At the same time, the review identifies major constraints. Carbon outcomes are uneven across sites and timescales, and soil-carbon responses are especially variable. Establishment costs, delayed returns, tenure insecurity, weak extension services, fragmented policy frameworks and unresolved questions around monitoring, reporting, permanence and additionality continue to limit scaling. The review therefore argues that agroforestry should be positioned not as a stand-alone climate solution but as a foundational component of broader net zero agricultural transitions. Its strongest contribution lies in combining mitigation with adaptation and multifunctionality. A credible scale-up agenda requires context-specific design, long-term measurement, better economic instruments, and policy architectures that reward whole-landscape performance rather than isolated farm practices.