g., seed of the fruit of only the poor-tasting, non-collected individuals remain in stands to FG-4592 concentration establish the next generation) or positive selection (e.g., seed are discarded from the fruit of superior, collected trees in locations suitable for germination and establishment) (Leakey et al., 2004). The human harvest of fruit could also lead to a reduction in number of animal seed dispersers, reducing genetic connectivity in populations and increasing the prospects for future inbreeding depression (Lowe et al., 2005). Where the NTFP is harvested non-destructively and is not the seed or fruit, impacts may depend more on harvesting impacts on forest regeneration

dynamics generally (Ticktin, 2004). Finally, sustainable NTFP management must also consider timber extraction activities in forests (Laird, 1998). First, timber and NTFPs are sometimes harvested from the same species, indicating competition or, occasionally, complementarity

in harvesting (Shanley and Luz, 2003). Of the top timber species in Cameroon, for example, Laird (1998) indicated that several had important non-timber values, although most of the widely marketed NTFPs in the region were not important timbers. The magnitude of any conflict between the possible multiple uses of a species may be location-specific, complicating supportive policy development for livelihoods (Herrero-Jáuregui et al., 2013). Second, the management of forest for timber influences the availability of NTFPs produced by other species through controlling access to forest, enhancing Mirabegron or inhibiting Sunitinib cost regeneration, etc. (Rist et al., 2012). Third, aspects of both NTFP and timber harvesting are sometimes explicitly combined in multiple-use forest management plans, with more or less success, in which an important issue is not to neglect the contribution of NTFPs compared to timber extraction (Guariguata et al., 2010). Agroforestry practices involve the integration

of trees with annual crop cultivation, livestock production and other farm activities (Garrity, 2004), and have been widely adopted globally, as illustrated by a geospatial analysis conducted by Zomer et al. (2009) that indicated approximately 560 million people living in farm landscapes with more than 10% tree cover. When grown on farms, tree products are often described as AFTPs to differentiate them from NTFPs and timber harvested from forests (Simons and Leakey, 2004). Gradations between natural forests, anthropogenic forests and agroforests, however, mean that there is often no clear boundary between AFTPs and NTFPs, a complicating factor in the estimation of relative contributions to livelihoods, and in devising management options tailored for different settings (Byron and Arnold, 1997).