Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
In This Section

Change and Adaptation in Socio-Ecological Systems

Climate Change, Social Changes, Technological Development

Ed. by Fürst, Christine / Geneletti, Davide

1 Issue per year

Emerging Science

Open Access
See all formats and pricing
In This Section

A participatory framework to assess multifunctional land-use systems with multicriteria and multivariate analyses: A case study on agrobiodiversity of agroforestry systems in Tomé Açú, Brazil

Daniel Callo-Concha
  • Corresponding author
  • Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn, Walter-Flex-Str. 3, 53113 Bonn, Germany
  • Email:
/ Manfred Denich
  • Department of Ecology and Natural Resources Management, Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn, Walter-Flex-Str. 3, 53113 Bonn, Germany
Published Online: 2014-10-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cass-2014-0005


In a participatory framework, the multifunctionality of agroforestry systems was assessed by applying multicriteria and multivariate analyses to identify ecological, agronomic and administrative proxies and integrate these into factors, and evaluate their effects on system performance. The assessment framework was tested in 70 farms in the municipality of Tomé-Açú in the Brazilian Amazon, an area well known for its long-standing practice of agroforestry. The overall goal was to identify management decisions that ensure sustainable production of goods together with the provision of ecosystem services, with special emphasis on agrobiodiversity. Three groups of farmers were considered based on their period of settlement, property size, technological know-how, organization and access to the market. The results show that the determinant factors of multifunctional farming are the farmers’ technical qualification, good adaptability, environmental commitment and the search for financial profitability. However, the optimization of these factors leads to trade-offs such as a decrease in biomass and woody species diversity and the decline of by-product production. By considering stakeholders’ opinions and being adaptable to various demands, the proposed framework enhances the legitimacy of the results, and supports both the assessment of complex issues and decision-making.

Keywords : Agricultural land-use systems; multifunctionality; participation; tropics


  • [1] ICRAF, The 2nd World Congress of Agroforestry Declaration, Agroforestry: The future of land use. Nairobi, 2009.

  • [2] Fleskens L., Duarte F., Eicher I., A conceptual framework for the assessment of multiple functions of agro-ecosystems: A case study of Trás-os-Montes olive groves, J. Rural Stud, 2009, 25, 141-155. [Crossref]

  • [3] Dobbs L., Pretty J., Agri-Environmental Stewardship Schemes and Multifunctionality, Rev. Agr. Econ., 2004, 26, 220-237. [Crossref]

  • [4] Marsden T., Sonnino R., Rural development and the regional state: Denying multifunctional agriculture in the UK, J. Rural Stud, 2008, 24, 422-431. [Crossref]

  • [5] Wilson G.A., From ‘weak’ to ‘strong’ multifunctionality: Conceptualising farm-level multifunctional transitional pathways, J. Rural Stud., 2008, 24, 367-383. [Crossref]

  • [6] CEC, Impact assessment: next steps. In support of competitiveness and sustainable development, Commission of the European Communities working paper 1377, Brussels, Belgium, 2004, http://ec.europa.eu/governance/impact/key_docs/ docs/sec_2004_1377_en.pdf

  • [7] IAASTD, International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science and Technology for Development, Summary for Decision Makers of the Global Report, Island Press, Washington, 2008.

  • [8] OECD, Multifunctionality: Towards an Analytical Framework, Policy Commission on the Future of Farming and Food, Farming and Food a Sustainable Future, London, 2001.

  • [9] Gómez S.A., González G.A., Multifunctionality of Agriculture: Tools and Methods for Impact Assessment and Valuation: A comprehensive assessment of multifunctional agricultural land-use systems in Spain using a multi-dimensional evaluative model, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2007,120, 82-91. [Crossref]

  • [10] McCarthy J., Rural geography: multifunctional rural geographies – reactionary or radical?, Prog. Hum. Geog., 2005, 29, 773–782. [Crossref]

  • [11] Zander P., Groot J., Multifunctionality of agriculture: Tools and methods for impact assessment and valuation, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2007, 120, 1-4.

  • [12] Franklin J.F., Structural and functional diversity in temperate forests, In: Wilson E.O. (Ed.), Biodiversity, National Academy Press, Washington DC, 1988.

  • [13] Stocking M., Agrodiversity, environmental protection and sustaining rural livelihoods: the global view, In: Brookfield H., Padoch C., Parsons H., Stocking M. (Eds)., Cultivating Biodiversity: Understanding, Analysing and Using Agricultural Diversity, The United Nations University, ITDG Publishing, London, 2002.

  • [14] Altieri M.A., Nicholls C., Biodiversity and Pest Management in Agroecosystems, 2nd Ed., The Harworth Press Inc., New York, 2004.

  • [15] Ehrenfeld D., Why Put a Value on Biodiversity, In: Wilson E.O. (Ed.), Biodiversity, National Academy Press., Washington D.C, 1988.

  • [16] Reid W.V., Mooney H.A., Cropper A., Capistrano D., Carpenter S.R., Chopra K., et al., Millenium Ecosystem Assessment Synthesis Report, Island Press, Washington DC, 2005.

  • [17] Hooper D.U., Vitousek P.M., The effects of plant composition and Diversity on Ecosystem processes, Science, 1997, 277, 1302-1305.

  • [18] Foley, J.A., DeFries R., Asner G.P., Barford C., Bonan G., Carpenter S.R., et al., Global consequences of land use, Science, 2005, 309, 570-574.

  • [19] Ramankutty N., Evan A.T., Monfreda C., Foley J.A., Farming the planet: 1. Geographic distribution of global agricultural lands in the year 2000, Global Biogeochemical Cycles, 2008, 22, DOI: 10.1029/2007GB002952. [Crossref]

  • [20] ICRAF, Paths to prosperity through agroforestry, International Centre for Research in Agroforestry corporate strategy 2001-2010, Nairobi, 2000.

  • [21] Kidd Ch.V., Pimentel D. (Eds.), Integrated Resource Management: Agroforestry for Development, Academic Press Inc. San Diego, California, 1992.

  • [22] Leakey R.R.B., Living with Trees of Life: Towards the Transformation of Tropical Agriculture, CABI, 2012.

  • [23] Brookfield H., Padoch C., Parsons H., Stocking M., Cultivating Biodiversity: Understanding, Analysing and Using Agricultural Diversity, ITDG Press, United Nations University, London, 2002.

  • [24] Shiva V., Monocultures of the Mind: Perspectives on Biodiversity and Biotechnology, Zed Books and Third World Network, Penang, 1993.

  • [25] Weesie P., van Andel J., On biodiversity and its valuation, Center of Development Studies, The University of Groningen, Groningen, 2003.

  • [26] Swift M.J., Izac A., van Noordwijk M., Biodiversity and ecosystem services in agricultural landscapes - are we asking the right questions?, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2004, 104, 113-134.

  • [27] Altieri M., Nicholls C., Ecosystem function and insect pest management in agricultural systems, In: Collins W.W. and Qualset C.O. (Eds.), Biodiversity in Agroecosystems, CRC Press, Boca Raton, 1999.

  • [28] McNeely J.A., Nature vs. nurture: managing relationships between forests agroforestry and wild biodiversity, Agroforest. Syst., 2004, 61, 155-165.

  • [29] Rojas L., Godoy C., Hanson P., Kleinn C., Hilje L., Diversidad de homópteros en plantaciones de café con diferentes tipos de sombra, en Turrialba, Costa Rica, Agroforestría en las Américas, 1999, 6, 33-35, (in Spanish).

  • [30] Guiracocha G., Harvey C., Somarriba E., Graus U., Carrillo E., Conservación de la biodiversidad en sistemas agroforestales con cacao y banano en Salamanca Costa Rica, Agroforestería en las Américas, 2011, 8, 7-11.

  • [31] Wezel A., Bender S., Plant species diversity of homegardens of Cuba and its significance for household food supply, Agroforest. Syst., 2003, 57, 39-49.

  • [32] Villavicencio-Enríquez L., Valdéz-Hernández J.I., Análisis de la estructura arbórea del sistema agroforestal rusticano de café en San Miguel, Veracruz, México, Agrociencia, 2003, 37, 413-423.

  • [33] Somarriba E., Harvey C.A., Samper M., Anthony F., Gonzáles J., Staver C., et al., Biodiversity Conservation in Neotropical Coffee (Coffea arabica) Plantations, In: Schroth G., da Fonseca G., Harvey C., Gascon C., Vasconcelos L., Izac A. (Eds.), Agroforestry and Biodiversity Conservation in Tropical Landscapes, Island Press, Washington, 2004.

  • [34] Kehlenbeck K., Maass B.L., Crop diversity and classification of homegardens in Central Sulawesi, Indonesia, Agroforest. Syst., 2004, 63, 53-62.

  • [35] Reidsma P., Tekelenburg T., van den Berg M., Alkemade R., Impacts of land-use change on biodiversity: An assessment of agricultural biodiversity in the European Union, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2006, 114, 86-102. [Crossref]

  • [36] Stork N.E., Boyle T.J.B., Dale V., Eeley H., Finegan B., Lawes M., et al., Criteria and Indicators for Assessing the Sustainability of Forest Management: Conservation of Biodiversity, Center for International Forestry Research working paper 17, 1997.

  • [37] Paoletti M.G., Invertebrate biodiversity as bioindicators of sustainable landscapes, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2001, 74, 9-11.

  • [38] Vandermeer J., Perfecto I.V.J., Breakfast of biodiversity: the truth about rainforest destruction, Food First Books, Oakland, 1995.

  • [39] Bates D.M. Ethnobotanical Perspectives of Agroforestry, In: James P., Lassoie L.B., Fernandes E.C.M. (Eds.), Agroforestry in Sustainable Agricultural Systems, CRS Press, Lewis Publisher, Boca Raton, 1999.

  • [40] Moonen A., Bàrberi P., Functional biodiversity: an agroecosystem approach, Agr. Ecosyst. Environ., 2008, 127, 7-21.

  • [41] Yamada M., Gholz H.L., An evaluation of agroforestry systems land-use change on soil nutrient dynamics in Amazonia, Agroforest. Syst., 2002, 55: 81-87.

  • [42] Jordan C., Amazonian Rainforests, Ecosystem Disturbance and Recovery, Ecological Studies, Springer-Verlag, New Jersey, 1987.

  • [43] Anderson A., Alternatives to Deforestation, Steps toward Sustainable Use of the Amazon Rain Forest, Columbia University Press, New York, 1990.

  • [44] Callo-Concha D., An approach to environmental services assessment: functional biodiversity in tropical agroforestry systems: The case of Tomé-Açú, Northern Brazil, PhD thesis, Ecology and Development Series N° 65, Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany, 2009.

  • [45] CIFOR, The CIFOR Criteria and Indicators Generic Template 2, Center for International Forestry Research, The European Commission, Deutsche Gesellschaft für Technische Zusammenarbeit (GTZ), Jakarta, Indonesia, 1999.

  • [46] Dogson J., Spackman M., Pearman A., Phillips L.D., Multicriteria analysis: a manual, Department for Communities and Local Government, London, 2009, http://eprints.lse. ac.uk/12761/

  • [47] Prabhu R., Colfer C.J.P., Dudley R.G., Guidelines for Developing, Testing and Selecting Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management: The Criteria & Indicators Toolbox Series, Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta, 1999.

  • [48] Mendoza G., Macoun P., Guidelines for Applying Multi-Criteria Analysis to the Assessment of Criteria and Indicators, The Criteria & Indicators Toolbox Series, Center for International Forest Research, Washington, 2002.

  • [49] Saaty, T. The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation, Mc Graw Hill, 1980.

  • [50] Mendoza G.A., Martins H., Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resources management: A critical review of methods and new modeling paradigms, Forest Ecol. Manag., 2006, 230,1-22.

  • [51] Kneshaw D., Messier C., Leduc A., Drapeau P., Carigan R., Pare D., et al., Towards Ecological Forestry: A proposal for Indicators of SFM inspired by Natural Disturbances, Sustainable Forest Management Network, Université du Québec à Montréal, Montreal, 2002 .

  • [52] Hair J.F., Anderson R.E., Tatham R.L., Black W.C., Multivariate data analysis, Prentice-Hall Inc., New Jersey, 1995.

  • [53] Sánchez P.A., Science in Agroforestry, Agroforest. Syst., 1995, 30, 5-55.

  • [54] Dobson A.P., Bradshaw A.D., Baker A.J.M., Hopes for the future: restoration ecology and conservation biology, Science, 1997, 277, 512-522.

  • [55] Nair P.K.R., An Introduction to Agroforestry, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1993.

  • [56] Nair P.K.R., Directions in tropical agroforestry research: past, present, and future, Agroforest. Syst., 1997, 38, 223-245.

  • [57] Huxley P., Tropical Agroforestry, Blackwell Science, Paris, 1999.

  • [58] Mendoza G.A., Macoun P., Guidelines for Applying Multi- Criteria Analysis to the Assessment of Criteria and Indicators: C&I Toolbox No 9, Center for International Forestry Research, Jakarta, 1999.

  • [59] Lebel L., Anderies J.M., Campbell B., Folke C., Hatfield-Dodds S., Hughes T.P., Wilson J., Governance and the capacity to manage resilience in regional social-ecological systems, Ecol. Soc., 2006, 11, 19.

  • [60] Lopez-Ridaura S., Van Keulen H., Van Ittersum M.K., Leffelaar P.A., Multiscale methodological framework to derive criteria and indicators for sustainability evaluation of peasant natural resource management systems, Environ. Develop. Sustain., 2005, 7, 51-69. [Crossref]

About the article

Received: 2013-07-09

Accepted: 2014-06-10

Published Online: 2014-10-28

Citation Information: Change and Adaptation in Socio-Ecological Systems, ISSN (Online) 2300-3669, DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cass-2014-0005. Export Citation

© 2014 Daniel Callo-Concha, Manfred Denich. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License. (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0)

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in