Análisis Comparativo de Métodos Brasileños para Evaluar el Desarrollo Sostenible en Agricultura

Osorio, Laura Gonçalves; Dias, Marcelo Fernandes Pacheco

doi:10.1590/1809-4422asoc00602vu27L5OA

home Sumário navigate_before Anterior Atual Seguinte navigate_next

home Sumário

Original Article • Ambient. soc. 27 • 2024 • https://doi.org/10.1590/1809-4422asoc00602vu27L5OA linkcopiar

Análisis Comparativo de Métodos Brasileños para Evaluar el Desarrollo Sostenible en Agricultura

Autoría SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Resumen

Esta investigación tiene como objetivo analizar diferencias y similitudes de los métodos brasileños para evaluar el desarrollo sustentable en establecimientos agropecuarios: Ambitec-Agro, APOIA-NovoRural e ISA. La metodología utilizada fue meta-estudio. Los resultados indicaron que los tres métodos, Ambitec-Agro, APOIA-NovoRural e ISA tienen entre sí similitudes y diferencias. Como conclusión, en oportunidad de elegir el método, debe otorgarse especial énfasis al alcance que tendrá el análisis a realizar en el establecimiento agropecuario (una tecnología, una actividad agrícola o el establecimiento en su conjunto). Adicionalmente, los tres métodos parten de indicadores establecidos a priori, lo cual imposibilita su elección.

Palabras-clave:
Agronegocios; desarrollo sustentable; métodos; evaluación; establecimiento agropecuario

Dimensions	Analysis category	Descriptions
Normative	Aim	General aim of the method
	Target public	Who does the method interests to?
	Sustainability concept	Adopted sustainability concept
	Origin of targets and indicators	How were sustainability assessment targets defined?
	Hierarchy levels and indicators	Hierarchical levels of sustainability assessment. What are the assessed indicators?
	Scoring and aggregation method	Assessment method of data aggregation indicator
	Function of the method	Purpose of the method
Systemic	Simplicity	Using simplicity for method understanding and representation purposes
Systemic	Sufficiency (complexity and parsimony)	Use of the complexity necessary for a successful assessment Interaction between the indicators addressed in the method

Methods	Material
Ambitec-Agro	(Rodrigues; Campanhola, 2003; Monteiro; Rodrigues, 2006). (Lima et al., 2014). (Monteiro et al., 2013). (Rodrigues; Kitamura, 2003) (Rodrigues; Pimenta; Casarini, 2016) Excel spreadsheet website: https://www.cnpma.embrapa.br/forms/apoia.php
APOIA-NovoRural	(Ramos Filho et al., 2004) (Demattê Filho , 2014). Excel spreadsheet website: www.cnpma.embrapa.br/forms/apoia.php
ISA	(Silva et al., 2017) (Ferreira et al., 2012). Excel spreadsheet website: www.epamig.br/projeto-isa/

Dimension	Categories	Comparison
Normative	(1) Goal	Similarities Environmental, economic and social impacts
	(2) Analysis unit	Different units Ambitec-Agrotechnology APOIA-NovoRural: carried out activities ISA: property as a whole.
	(3) Target public	Similarities farmers Public managers of agricultural promotion and development
	(4) Sustainability concepts	Similarities Triple bottom line analysis.
	(5) Origin of indicators	Similarities Pre-established indicators
	(6) Origin of targets	Different targets APOIA-NovoRural and ISA adopt a baseline of 0.7 Ambitec-Agro evaluates the changes that occurred between two moments, with different degrees and qualities (positive or negative).
	(7) Hierarchical levels	Similarities presence of more than one hierarchical level
	(8) Data aggregation	Different forms of aggregation Ambitec-Agro: the result is presented through a column graph, generating an index that varies between - 15 (maximum decrease = decrease in impact) and + 15 (maximum increase = increase in impact). APOIA-NovoRural and ISA: utility scale ranging from 0 to 1, with the baseline value of environmental compliance standardized at 0.7.
	(9) Possibility of weighting the indicators	Different weighting possibilities Ambitec-Agro: weighs 1) the weight of each indicator and 2) the scope of the impact APOIA-NovoRural; considers 1) severity of impact and 2) scope of impact ISA: no possibility of weighting
	(10) Function of the tool in an environmental management system	Different functions Similar in terms of presenting a diagnosis. ISA stands out for its ability to propose action plans in the tool itself.
Systemic	(11) Simplicity	Similarities Results in graphical and easy-to-understand form.
	(12) Sufficiency and parsimony	Similarities Integrative approach to the dimensions of sustainable development Emphasis on the environmental dimension of sustainable development.
	(13) Interactions between indicators	Similarities Indicators independent from each other.

vertical_align_top show_chart

more_horiz close
- image
- translate
- link
- article
- vertical_align_top
- file_download
- show_chart
- image
- translate
- link
- article

location_on

ANPPAS - Revista Ambiente e Sociedade Anppas / Revista Ambiente e Sociedade - São Paulo - SP - Brazil
E-mail: revistaambienteesociedade@gmail.com

rss_feed Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[TFN1] Source: Elaborated by the authors (based on Binder et al., , Feola e Steinberger (2010;); Marchand et al., 2014; De Olde, 2017).