Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

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
Online
ISSN
2300-3669
See all formats and pricing
More options …

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
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Manfred Denich
  • Department of Ecology and Natural Resources Management, Center for Development Research (ZEF), University of Bonn, Walter-Flex-Str. 3, 53113 Bonn, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2014-10-28 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/cass-2014-0005

Abstract

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

References

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

  • [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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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

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

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

  • [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 Google Scholar

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

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

  • [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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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

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

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

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

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

  • [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). Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

  • [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. CrossrefGoogle Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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/ Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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 . Google Scholar

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

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

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

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

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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. Google Scholar

  • [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.CrossrefGoogle Scholar

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. BY-NC-ND 3.0

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in