Background: Under the Kyoto Protocol, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions can be reduced by managing trees in agroecosystems such agroforestry, ethnoforests, and trees outside of forests. Because agroforestry systems have secondary environmental benefits like preserving and reestablishing biodiversity both below and above ground, preserving watershed hydrology, boosting farm income, assisting in achieving food security and in contrast to oceanic and other terrestrial solutions [1], they are a superior option for mitigating climate change since they secure land tenure in underdeveloped countries and act as corridors between protected forests and CH4 sinks.

Aims: Aim of the study is to find out how agroforestry system sequester carbon and gives a pillar of livelihood to poor people looking different climate change issues. 

Objectives: The primary objective of the study was to evaluate how agroforestry can assist farmers in reducing the negative impacts of climate change on their livelihoods and carbon sequestration.

Key findings: Around 820 million individuals experience chronic malnutrition and hunger, impoverished agricultural populations are especially vulnerable to climate change. Long-term, flexible livelihood arrangements are necessary for small farmers and the impoverished, and these always need reliance on a range of goods. The current US emission rate of 1,600 Tg C/year from the burning of fossil fuels (natural gas, petroleum, and combustion) may be 34% offset, because agroforestry retains carbon [2]. For the long-term sequestration and storage of carbon, the preservation of sizable ecosystems or farms may lead to a return to subsistence and fiber production. Among all agroforestry systems, the Taungya agroforestry system was responsible for 174 MgC/ha of the carbon buildup in agroforestry networks.

Findings: People in the area might turn back to other goods like fiber and sustenance if sizable nature reserves or plantations are kept up for the long term in order to sequester and store carbon. Out of all the agroforestry systems, the Taungya system was responsible for 174 MgC/ha of the carbon storage in agroforestry networks [3]. Therefore, significant socioeconomic and environmental issues, as well as local involvement and veto power, must be considered in carbon offset rules. 69 and 64 percent of the total system C in the silvopasture and plantation, respectively, came from the complete above- and below-ground tree C stock.

Conclusions: In order to comprehend how poverty and livelihoods are impacted by climate change, one must delve deeply into the intricacies of poverty, the lives of those who are impoverished and those who are not, as well as the various and intricate connections between poverty and climate change. The development of suitable policies, supported by robust national scientific studies, is also required to better understand the potential of agroforestry and ethno-forestry for reducing climate change and enhancing human well-being.