Embrapa’s platform for impact assessment    of agricultural technologies and Indicator systems for the environmental      ...
Contents of this presentation• Topic 1: Embrapa´s strategic planning process and the institutional  platform for the impac...
Topic 1: Embrapa´s strategic planning  process and the institutional platformfor the impact assessment of technology      ...
A strategic planning process has been implemented at Embrapa to      introduce ‘sustainable development objectives’ in all...
A dedicated impact assessment system has been       developed toward this end, integrating 24 criteria, and a             ...
The multi-criteria system integrates ‘change coefficients’   check in field surveys with technology adopters, withweightin...
The weighting procedures generate ‘socio-environmental performance indices’(± 15 scale), detailed by criterion, dimension,...
An analysis of results obtained for 123 innovations, in 180 matched    social-environmental assessments carried out betwee...
Contributions of the                   Ambitec-Agro system• Improve the understanding among agricultural researchers and  ...
Topic 2  Integrated farm sustainabilityassessment for the environmental  management of rural activities      APOIA-NovoRural
APOIA-NovoRural                        Sustainability dimensions                                     Landscape Ecology    ...
Goods                                                                      Geologic       Fuels                &          ...
APOIA-NovoRural• The rural establishment is the spatial scale of analysis,which is performed analytically and quantitative...
Typical multi-attribute scaling checklist for Indicator           assessment and Utility valuation                   Table...
Each indicator is constructed according to theappropriate utility correspondence table and           transformation function
Number of Environmental Performance                         lacking                                                   indi...
Field survey and data gathering / interview
Land uses, natural habitats, productionareas and layout of the rural establishment
• Environmentalmanagementreport, individuallyoffered for farmers,with the set ofresults andrecommendations.• Let’s see som...
Field trials in   Indonesia - Nucleus (Libo)and Plasma areas (smallholders)Follow up on the trainingseminar at SMARTRI Rod...
0,80            0,70            0,60            0,50     S     d     b     n     u     e     c     y     a     s     t    ...
0,80                                                                                       LandscapeEcol                  ...
Nata da Serra Farm, Serra Negra (SP)Demonstration Organic Unit, ‘Balde Cheio’ (full bucket) project                       ...
Technological integration for milk production     “Embrapa Southeastern Livestock”Nocturnal grazing and the ‘Balde Cheio’ ...
Balde Cheio Project BasicsHigh productivity forages +       Intensive pastures +         Shade +                      Gene...
Projeto Balde Cheio (2)  Cleanliness +                                                                Organization        ...
Sustainability analysis                              Nata da Serra Farm                                      Condição dos ...
Sustainability analysis (2)                 Nata da Serra Farm                                                            ...
Sustainability analysis (3)                             Nata da Serra Farm                            Renda               ...
Sustainability analysis                             Nata da Serra Farm, julho 2010                                        ...
PROBIO II PROJECT                   Integrated Public-Private Actions for Biodiversity                            MMA / SB...
OBJECTIVE:To promote the integration of environmentalmanagement procedures in rural establishmentsdedicated to the agro-en...
INSTITUTIONAL JUSTIFICATIONExtension of the initiatives for methodological development in environmentalmanagement of rural...
1.1. Oil-palm, Agropalma,                                      Tailândia (PA)                                             ...
FIELD ACTIVITIES AND CASE STUDIES  Unidade de                                                                             ...
0,85                                                                                                                 Dimen...
APOIA-NovoRural : applications and case studies (n≈200)   1.   Validation step: Environmental management of agrotourism, o...
Scope of analysis               Case study                   References1. Specific agricultural   1.1 Family farming      ...
0,85                              0,80     Sustainability indices                              0,75                       ...
Conclusions The adoption of environmental management tools, such as the onesexemplified here, is instrumental for promoti...
Acknowledgements:- Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo– FAPESP- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cien...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Embrapa’s platform for impact assessment of agricultural technologies and Indicator systems for the environmental management of rural activities

1,921 views
1,784 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,921
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
704
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Embrapa’s platform for impact assessment of agricultural technologies and Indicator systems for the environmental management of rural activities

  1. 1. Embrapa’s platform for impact assessment of agricultural technologies and Indicator systems for the environmental management of rural activities Centro Internacional de Agricultura Tropical Cali, Colombia 03 de agosto de 2012 Geraldo Stachetti Rodrigues stacheti@cnpma.embrapa.br
  2. 2. Contents of this presentation• Topic 1: Embrapa´s strategic planning process and the institutional platform for the impact assessment of technology innovations;• A dedicated ‘system for impact assessment of agricultural technology innovations’ (Ambitec-Agro) and some results;• Topic 2: integrated farm sustainability assessment for the environmental management of rural activities (APOIA-NovoRural);• A general view of case studies;• Conclusions.
  3. 3. Topic 1: Embrapa´s strategic planning process and the institutional platformfor the impact assessment of technology innovations Ambitec-Agro• RODRIGUES, G.S.; CAMPANHOLA, C.; KITAMURA, P.C. Avaliação de impactoambiental da inovação tecnológica agropecuária: um sistema de avaliação parao contexto institucional de P&D. Cadernos de Ciência e Tecnologia. v.19, n.3, p.349-375, 2002.• RODRIGUES, G.S.; CAMPANHOLA, C.; KITAMURA, P.C. An environmentalimpact assessment system for agricultural R&D. Environmental ImpactAssessment Review. v.23, n.2, p. 219-244, 2003.• RODRIGUES, G.S.; CAMPANHOLA, C.; KITAMURA, P.C. Avaliação de impactoambiental da inovação tecnológica agropecuária: AMBITEC-AGRO. Jaguariúna:Embrapa Meio Ambiente. Documentos 34, 2003• IRIAS L.J.M.; RODRIGUES G.S.; CAMPANHOLA C.; KITAMURA P.C.; RODRIGUESI.; BUSCHINELLI C.C.A. Sistema de Avaliação de Impacto Ambiental deInovações Tecnológicas nos Segmentos Agropecuário, Produção Animal eAgroindústria (Sistema Ambitec). Jaguariúna: Embrapa Meio Ambiente. CircularTécnica 5. 2004.• IRIAS, L.J.M.; GEBLER, L.; PALHARES, J.C.P.; ROSA, M.F. de; RODRIGUES, G.S. Avaliação de impacto ambiental de inovações tecnológicasagropecuárias – aplicação do Sistema Ambitec. Agricultura em São Paulo. v.51, n.1, p. 23-40. 2004.• RODRIGUES, G.S.; CAMPANHOLA, C.; KITAMURA, P.C.; IRIAS, L.J.; RODRIGUES, I.A. Sistema de avaliação de impacto social da inovaçãotecnológica agropecuária (Ambitec-Social). Jaguariúna: Embrapa Meio Ambiente. Boletim de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento 35, 2005.• RODRIGUES, G.S.; BUSCHINELLI, C.C. de A.; AVILA, A.F.D. An environmental impact assessment system for agricultural research anddevelopment II: institutional learning experience at Embrapa. Journal of Technology Management & Innovation. v.5, n.4, p. 38-56, 2010.
  4. 4. A strategic planning process has been implemented at Embrapa to introduce ‘sustainable development objectives’ in all steps of agricultural Research and Development: Mission Statement: “To provide feasible solutions for the sustainable development of Brazilian agribusiness through knowledge and technology generation and transfer”An essential component of the mission statement has called for the systematic assessment of social and environmental impacts (in addition to the traditionally studied economic ones) of all technology innovations resulting from R&D
  5. 5. A dedicated impact assessment system has been developed toward this end, integrating 24 criteria, and a total of 125 performance indicators Environmental Impact Assessment Technology Innovation in Agriculture Base System for Eco-certification of Rural Activities (Eco-cert.Rural) (Ambitec-Agro) Ecological Performance Socio-Environmental Performance Use of Inputs Environmental Customer Management & Employment Income Health and Resources Quality Respect Administration 1. Use of Agricultural 4. Atmosphere 9. Product Quality 11. Training 15. Net Income 18. Personal and 21. Farmer CapabilityInputs and Resources Generation Environmental Health and Dedication 5. Soil Quality 10. Production Ethics 12. Opportunity and2. Use of Veterinarian Qualification for Local 16. Income Sources 19. Occupational 22. Trade 6. Water Quality Inputs and Raw Employment Diversity Safety & Health Arrangements materials 7. Biodiversity 13. Job Generation 17. Land Value 20. Food Safety & 23. Waste Disposal 3. Use of Energy 8. Environmental and Engagement Security Restoration 24. Institutional 14. Employment Relationship Quality 125 indicators RODRIGUES, G.S.; CAMPANHOLA, C.; KITAMURA, P.C. An environmental impact assessment system for agricultural R&D. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. v.23, n.2, p. 219-244, 2003.
  6. 6. The multi-criteria system integrates ‘change coefficients’ check in field surveys with technology adopters, withweighting factors for indicator importance and spatial scale of occurrence, for example: Table of change coefficients for variable Environmental restoration variables weighing Legally-defined Environmental Restoration Degraded Mandatory factor Degraded soils Preservation ecosystems Protection Areas check Areas Weighing factors k 0,3 0,3 0,4 0 1 Non Mark with X occurence = applicable an X Scale of Near 1 Proximate 2 3 3 Surrounding 5 3 Impact Coefficient = (change coefficients * weighing factors) 1,8 4,5 2,4 0 8,7 • The system integrates 24 such checklists, for each one of the criteria, considering the set of 125 indicators.
  7. 7. The weighting procedures generate ‘socio-environmental performance indices’(± 15 scale), detailed by criterion, dimension, and integrated impact, accordingto the field-observed contexts. Peso do Coeficientes Indices Indicadores de impacto da atividade indicador desempenho integrados Uso de Insumos Agrícolas e Recursos 0,05 8,0 Uso de 10,08 Uso de Insumos Veterinários e Matérias-primas 0,05 5,0 insumos Uso de Energia 0,05 13,0 8,67 10,08 Atmosfera 0,02 5,0 Qualidade -15 0 15 Qualidade do Solo 0,05 10,0 ambiental Índice de Impacto Ambiental Qualidade da Água 0,05 12,5 Biodiversidade 0,05 15,0 11,50 Recuperação Ambiental 0,05 15,0 Respeito ao Qualidade do Produto 0,05 7,5 consumidor Ética Produtiva 0,05 7,0 12,69 Capacitação 0,05 12,5 7,25 Oportunidade de Emprego Local Qualificado 0,02 13,0 Emprego Oferta e Condição de Trabalho 0,05 13,0 -15 0 15 Qualidade do Emprego 0,05 13,0 12,88 12,69 Índice de Impacto Econômico Geração de Renda 0,05 12,5 Renda Diversidade de Fontes de Renda 0,025 12,5 Valor da Propriedade 0,025 12,5 12,50 Saúde Ambiental e Pessoal 0,02 7,0 10,35 Saúde Segurança e Saúde Ocupacional 0,02 13,0 Segurança Alimentar 0,05 12,0 10,67 10,35 Dedicação e Perfil do Responsável 0,05 13,0 Gestão -15 0 15 Condição de Comercialização 0,05 13,5 Índice de Impacto Social Disposição de Resíduos 0,05 13,0 13,13 Relacionamento Institucional 0,02 13,0 Averiguação Índice de impacto da 1 da atividade 11,42 -15 0 15 ponderação Índice geral de impacto da atividade
  8. 8. An analysis of results obtained for 123 innovations, in 180 matched social-environmental assessments carried out between 2006-2008 8 Índices de Impacto Ambiental 4 0 0 5 10 15 -4 -8 Índices de Impacto SocialTecnologias de uso de insumos Tecnologias de recursos genéticos e melhoramento animal / vegetalTecnologias Agroindustriais / Pós-colheita Tecnologias de melhores práticasTecnologias de Manejo integrado de recursos naturais
  9. 9. Contributions of the Ambitec-Agro system• Improve the understanding among agricultural researchers and farmers, about the social and environmental implications of technology development and adoption; Improve the acceptance of EIA methods, so that more sophisticated, analytical, quantitative and objective approaches may be proposed• and introduced (for instance, the APOIA-NovoRural approach, presented in our topic 2).
  10. 10. Topic 2 Integrated farm sustainabilityassessment for the environmental management of rural activities APOIA-NovoRural
  11. 11. APOIA-NovoRural Sustainability dimensions Landscape Ecology Environmental Quality (atmosphere, water, and soil) Socio-cultural Values Economic Values Management and AdministrationRODRIGUES, G. S.; RODRIGUES, I. A.; BUSCHINELLI, C. C. A.; BARROS, I. . Integrated farm sustainability assessment forthe environmental management of rural activities. Environmental Impact Assessment Review. v.30, n.4, p. 229-239, 2010.
  12. 12. Goods Geologic Fuels & Runoff, uplift Tourism, Rain ServicesA systemic, Erosion Immigrationadequate and Wind, Atmosphere Soilsufficient set Evapot . Water People Livestockof objective,quantitative Environmental Systems Marketsindicators. Sun Agriculture Establishment Forestry Farm system After H.T. Odum 1 Landscape 2 Environmental Quality 3 Economic 4 Sociocultural Ecology Values Values 1 Conservation state of Atmosphere 52 Establish profit 44 Access education natural habitats 14 Suspended 45 Access basic services 53 Divers. Sources 2 Divers. & mangmt particles/ Water 54 Profit distrib. 46 Consumption stand. production areas smoke 20 Dissolved O2 47 Access sport leisure 55 Indebtedness level 3 Divers. & mangmt 15 Foul odors 21 Coliforms 48 Conservation legacy 56 Establish value confined activities 16 Noise 22 BOD5 49 Employment quality 57 Habitation quality 4 Minimum preserve 17 Carbon oxide / 23 pH 50 Occupational safety area Hydrocarbon 24 Nitrate 51 Qualif. employment 5 Designated protection emissions 25 Phosphate areas 18 Sulfur oxide 26 Suspended solids Soil conservation 6 Fauna corridors emissions 27 Chlorophyll a 34 Organic matter content 7 Landscape diversity 19 Nitrogen oxide 28 Conductivity 35 pH 5 Management 8 Productive diversity emissions 29 Visual pollution 36 Phosphate 58 Manager profile & 9 Reclamation degraded 30 Pesticides potential 37 K exchangeable dedication areas impact 38 Mg (& Ca) exchangeable 59 Commercialization 10 Sources endemic 39 Potential acidity (Al + H) disease vectors Groundwater 40 Sum of cations conditions 60 Residue recycling 11 Local extinction 31 Coliforms 41 Cation Exchange Capacity 61 Chemical inputs endangrd species 32 Nitrate 42 Volume of bases management 12 Fire hazard 33 Conductivity 43 Erosion 62 Institutional 13 Geotechnical hazard relationships
  13. 13. APOIA-NovoRural• The rural establishment is the spatial scale of analysis,which is performed analytically and quantitatively with62 indicators in a field survey / interview.• Sustainability indices are automatically calculated andexpressed as utility values (0-1), with sustainabilityconformity level standardized at 0.7;
  14. 14. Typical multi-attribute scaling checklist for Indicator assessment and Utility valuation Table of percent personnel Qualification required manual work manual work Uneducated Engineering Specialized Technician level work level work Local opportunity for higher qualification employment Weighing factors k 1 2 3 4 Worker origin Establish- ment 10 20 60 Local village 5 20 Region 1 Check 100Qualified employment index = (sum pi*k1*k2) 1700 Best fit equation for Utility IQEmp Utility 1 100 0 1700 Exponential fit: y=a(1-exp(-bx)) 200 0,1 Coefficients: Utility 300 0,2 a= 1,01 400 0,4 b= 1,E-03 500 0,6 0 1000 0,8 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 Qualified employment index 4000 1 U-IQEmp = 0,88
  15. 15. Each indicator is constructed according to theappropriate utility correspondence table and transformation function
  16. 16. Number of Environmental Performance lacking indicators Landscape EcologyLandscape Ecology 0,77 0 0,7Environmental Quality - Atmosphere 0,85 0 0,7 Environmental Quality - Management & Administration 0,91 0 AtmosphereEnvironmental Quality - Waters 0,7Environmental Quality - Soil 0,72 0 0,7Sociocultural Values 0,71 0 0,7 Environmental Quality -Economic Values 0,85 0 Economic Values 0,7 WatersManagement & Administration 0,79 1 0,7 Sociocultural Values Environmental Quality - Soil 0,80 1 Sustainability dimensions performance 0,80 0,00 0,25 0,50 0,75 1,00 Rural establishment Sustainability indexThe integrated results offer a basis for environmental management
  17. 17. Field survey and data gathering / interview
  18. 18. Land uses, natural habitats, productionareas and layout of the rural establishment
  19. 19. • Environmentalmanagementreport, individuallyoffered for farmers,with the set ofresults andrecommendations.• Let’s see somecase studies…
  20. 20. Field trials in Indonesia - Nucleus (Libo)and Plasma areas (smallholders)Follow up on the trainingseminar at SMARTRI Rodrigues GS, Verwilghen A, Widodo RH, Pujianto, Caliman JP. An Assessment Tool and Integrated Index for Sustainable Oil Palm Production. Proceedings of the International Congress on Oil Palm and the Environment (ICOPE 2010). 23 - 25 February 2010, Bali, Indonesia.
  21. 21. 0,80 0,70 0,60 0,50 S d b n u e c y a s t l iCase study results: sustainability indices for selected oil palm landholdings in Sumatra, Indonesia.
  22. 22. 0,80 LandscapeEcol y; olog 0,75 EnvironQual ec pe 0,70 dsca SocioculVal Lan 0,65  im EconomicVal t on po S d b n u e c y a s t l i r ta 0,60 nt ac p ManagemAdm 0,40 osi p 0,30 0,50 0,60 0,70 0,80 0,90 1,00 ve im ti v e Impact indices for the assessment dimensions im pa gati ct  opportunity for in improvement in Management indicators;Case study th t ne ei n results:  general improvement dica indicators of Sociocultural values; an in the to port rs of Ec  im on om ic va lu es ;
  23. 23. Nata da Serra Farm, Serra Negra (SP)Demonstration Organic Unit, ‘Balde Cheio’ (full bucket) project Main productive activity: • Milk production, organic Associated activities: • Organic horticulture • Organic yogurt production • Organic coffee production • Pedagogical tourism 15 employees and family members, partnership system and revenue sharing
  24. 24. Technological integration for milk production “Embrapa Southeastern Livestock”Nocturnal grazing and the ‘Balde Cheio’ Project Rodrigues GS et al. Avaliação sócio-ambiental da integração tecnológica Embrapa Pecuária Sudeste para produção leiteira na agricultura familiar. Agricultura em São Paulo. 53(2): 35-48. 2006
  25. 25. Balde Cheio Project BasicsHigh productivity forages + Intensive pastures + Shade + Genetics +
  26. 26. Projeto Balde Cheio (2) Cleanliness + Organization Evolução da produtividade de leite por hectare 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 763 1049 1757 2325 4298 5588 6207 7285 8000 7000 6000 Litros / ha 5000 4000 3000 2000 1000 0= PRODUCTIVITY 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
  27. 27. Sustainability analysis Nata da Serra Farm Condição dos Habitats Naturais Risco geotécnico Manejo áreas produtivas Risco incêndio Manejo não agrícola Extinção de espécies Reserva Legal Vetores Doenças Áreas preservação permanenteRegeneração áreas degradadas Corredores fauna Diversidade produtiva Diversidade paisagem "Baseline" Utilidade Variação percentual Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores de Ecologia da Paisagem
  28. 28. Sustainability analysis (2) Nata da Serra Farm Matéria orgânica Partículas e fumaça Erosão pH NOx Odores Saturação bases Fósforo CTC Potássio SOx Ruído Soma bases Magnésio COx "Baseline" Acidez potencial Utilidade "Baseline" Utilidade Variação percentualValores de Utilidade dos indicadores Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores dede Qualidade Ambiental - Atmosfera Qualidade Ambiental - Solo Oxigênio Dissolvido Condutividade água subterr. Coliformes Nitrato água subterr. DBO5 "Baseline" Coliformes água subter. pH Utilidade Pesticidas Nitrato Variação percentual Poluição visual Fosfato Condutividade Turbidez Clorofila a Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores de Qualidade Ambiental - Água
  29. 29. Sustainability analysis (3) Nata da Serra Farm Renda Perfil do responsável Diversidade fontes Moradia de renda Relação Comercialização institucionalValor da propriedade Distribuição renda Gestão insumos Endividamento Reciclagem químicos "Baseline" "Baseline" Utilidade Utilidade Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores de Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores de Valores Econôm icos Gestão / Administração Educação Oportunidade de emprego Serviços básicos "Baseline" Saúde ocupacional Padrão consumo Utilidade Índice 2 Qualidade emprego Esporte e lazer Patrimônio cultural Valores de Utilidade dos indicadores de Valores Socioculturais
  30. 30. Sustainability analysis Nata da Serra Farm, julho 2010 Número de Índice de Impacto Ambiental indicadores da Atividade faltantesEcologia da Paisagem 0,90 0 0,7 Ecologia da PaisagemQualidade ambiental - Atmosfera 0,85 0 0,7 Qualidade ambiental -Qualidade ambiental - Água 0,96 0 Gestão e Administração 0,7 AtmosferaQualidade Ambiental - Solo 0,79 0 0,7Valores Socioculturais 0,86 0 0,7 Valores Econômicos Qualidade ambiental - ÁguaValores Econômicos 0,93 0 0,7Gestão e Administração 0,97 1 0,7 Valores Socioculturais Qualidade Ambiental - Solo 0,89 1 Desempenho ambiental das Dimensões de avaliação 0,89 0,00 0,25 0,50 0,75 1,00 Índice de sustentabilidade do estabelecimento
  31. 31. PROBIO II PROJECT Integrated Public-Private Actions for Biodiversity MMA / SBF / GEF, World Bank EMBRAPA ENVIRONMENT COMPONENT 1.2.08.04 – Bioenergy and impacts on biodiversity Research Team: Geraldo Stachetti Rodrigues Marcos Neves Nelson G. DominguesEnvironmental Management Laboratory Lourival C. ParaibaEmbrapa Environment Waldemore Moriconiwww.cnpma.embrapa.br Izilda Ap. Rodrigues Carolina Daher Cláudio C. de A. Buschinelli
  32. 32. OBJECTIVE:To promote the integration of environmentalmanagement procedures in rural establishmentsdedicated to the agro-energy sector, in order toorganize their efforts for biodiversity protection, interritories surrounding Conservation Units.
  33. 33. INSTITUTIONAL JUSTIFICATIONExtension of the initiatives for methodological development in environmentalmanagement of rural activities, previously applied in the National NetworkMacro-projects “Biodiesel and Energy Forests”- Priority productive chains defined for the first phase of the project: eucaliptus, sugar-cane, soybean and oil palm
  34. 34. 1.1. Oil-palm, Agropalma, Tailândia (PA) 2. Serra do Cabral State Preserve,1. Agropalma Forest Preserve, Buenópolis (MG) Tailândia (PA) 3. Project for Forest Restoration in 5. iLCF, Mogi Guaçu Farm, the Medium Rio Doce (IEF-ITTO) Paragominas (PA) Resplendor/Aimorés (MG) 4. José Emídio Setlement and ‘Mata do Junco’ Preserve, Capela (SE)
  35. 35. FIELD ACTIVITIES AND CASE STUDIES Unidade de Estudo de caso – conservação Localidade e Parcerias estabelecimento rural (área), e cultura energéticae data dos trabalhos de campo bioma institucionaisReserva Florestal Tailândia (PA) Grupo Agropalma Fazenda Agropalma (107 mil ha)Agropalma Floresta ombrófila Embrapa Amazônia Oriental Palma-de-óleo (dendê)27-30 / 07 / 2010 equatorial (Amazônia)Parque Estadual Buenópolis e Joaquim Instituto Estadual de Florestas Fazenda Riacho dos Cavalosda Serra do Felício (MG) (IEF), EPAMIG, Embrapa Milho (120 ha) Cerrados e campos e Sorgo, Gerência doCabral rupestres PESCabral Fazenda Vitória (5700 ha),(PESCabral) Eucalipto / Integração pecuária06 e 07 / 08 / 2010 florestaRPPN Fazenda Aimorés (MG) IEF, Projeto de Recuperação Fazenda Vargem Alegre (131 ha) Floresta Estacional de áreas degradadas do Médio Restauração ecológica (APP fluvial)Bulcão Atlântica Rio Doce (ITTO)18 / 08 / 2010Refúgio de Vida Capela (SE) Embrapa Tabuleiros Costeiros, Lote Neto, Assentamento José Floresta ombrófila tropical SEMARH, ADEMA, INCRASilvestre Mata do (Mata Atlântica) (SE), SEMA-Capela, Emídio dos Santos (6,6 ha)Junco Assentamento José Emídio dos Cana-de-açúcar22 / 09 / 2010 Santos, Gerência do RVS_Mata-do-JuncoExercício Paragominas (PA) Embrapa Amazônia Oriental, Fazenda Rio Grande (927 ha)preparatório – Floresta ombrófila Projetos MP02 – Plantio Direto / Fazenda Mogi Guaçu (10.000 equatorial (Amazônia) Integração Lavoura-Pecuária-Flona Santarém Florestas (iLPF) ha)29 e 30 / 09 / 2010 Soja/milho; iLPF (soja/milho/feno)
  36. 36. 0,85 Dimensão Gestão e administração Índice integrado de sustentabilidade R2 = 0,96 0,80 0,75 0,70 0,65 0,60 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 Ecologia da paisagem Atmosfera Água Solo Valores socioculturais Valores econômicos Gestão e administração Índices de desempenho ambiental para as dimensões de sustentabilidade consideradas (n = 05 estudos de caso)Results of five case studies carried out in the project ‘Bioenergy and impacts on biodiversity’ (Probio II) based on theAPOIA-NovoRural indicators system. The data show the distribution of environmental performance indices for theseveral dimensions considered, as well as the associated sustainability indices. Emphasis is placed on the“Management and administration” dimension (), main determinant of sustainability in the rural establishmentsobserved in the sample.
  37. 37. APOIA-NovoRural : applications and case studies (n≈200) 1. Validation step: Environmental management of agrotourism, organic farming and fee fishing; 2. Territorial environmental management of agrotourism and organic farming – case studies in Itu (SP), Venda Nova (ES), Ibiúna (SP) and Frsc. Beltrão (PR) 3. Territorial environmental management of rural activities in the Mamanguape River (PB) Protection Area 4. Environmental assessment of Precision Agriculture in no-till grain production in the Rio Verde (GO) region 5. Environmental management of ostrich farming 6. Environmental management of rural establishments around the Caratinga Biological Preserve (MG) and ecological corridors for the endangered Brachyteles hypoxanthus 7. Environmental Impact Assessment in the “Proyecto Producción Responsable” – a National Rural Development Program in Uruguay 8. Integrated strawberry production and environmental management in family agriculture 9. Socio-environmental impact assessment of oleaginous crops for biodiesel production 10. Bioenergy and impacts on biodiversity (GEF 1.2.08.04)Rodrigues GS et al. Integrated farm sustainability assessment for the environmental management of rural activities.Environmental Impact Assessment Review. 30:229-239, 2010.
  38. 38. Scope of analysis Case study References1. Specific agricultural 1.1 Family farming Rodrigues et al., 2003b;production system / sustainability – Rodrigues et al, 2006bactivity horticulture, agro- tourism, fee-fishing 1.2 Integrated Fruit Buschinelli et al., 2007; Production Calegario et al., 2009 1.3 Precision agriculture Rodrigues et al., 2008b2. Agricultural 2.1 Ostrich farming Rodrigues et al., 2007a;productive sectors Rodrigues et al., 2008a 2.2 Oleaginous crops for Rodrigues et al., 2007b; biodiesel Rodrigues et al., 2009b3. Territorial 3.1 Organic agriculture Rodrigues et al., 2006aenvironmental and agro-tourismmanagement sustainable management 3.2 Rural activities in the Rodrigues et al., 2008c Mamanguape Protection Area 3.3 Rural establishments Lino et al., 2009 around the Caratinga Biological Station4. Countrywide rural 4.1 Integrated natural Rodrigues and Moreira-development program resources and Viñas, 2007a;b biodiversity management project, Uruguay
  39. 39. 0,85 0,80 Sustainability indices 0,75 0,70 0,65 0,60 0,55 0,50 0,00 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 Performance indices for assessment dimensionsResults of case studies (n= 177), showing the distribution of performance indices.Sustainability dimensions with higher correlations to the integrated indices, i.e., Landscape ecology (♦- corr coef = 0.78) and Management and administration (■ – corr coef = 0.62) appear highlighted.
  40. 40. Conclusions The adoption of environmental management tools, such as the onesexemplified here, is instrumental for promoting the sustainability of ruralactivities; Sound agricultural management, production systems, and technologyadoption decision-making ensuing from environmental impact assessmentsfavor product quality and productive efficiency, hence improvingcompetitiveness and market insertion; Environmental Assessment Systems are valuable management tools forreconciling ecological integrity, economic vitality and socio-cultural equityobjectives for sustainable development.
  41. 41. Acknowledgements:- Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo– FAPESP- Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico eTecnológico - CNPq- IICA / PROCISUR- EmbrapaAll farmers who participated of case studies, for their interestand kind reception to our research team. Thank you!

×