| |
|
|
|
Registro Completo |
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Amazônia Oriental. |
|
Data corrente: |
27/06/2014 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
19/10/2022 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Autoria: |
SIST, P.; SABLAYROLLES, P.; BARTHELON, S.; SOUSA-OTA, L.; KIBLER, J.-F.; RUSCHEL, A.; SANTOS-MELO, M.; EZZINE-DE-BLAS, D. |
|
Afiliação: |
Plinio Sist, CIRAD; Philippe Sablayrolles, Gret (Groupe de recherche et d'échanges technologiques); Sophie Barthelon, Gret (Groupe de recherche et d'échanges technologiques); Liz Sousa-Ota, UNESP; Jean-François Kibler, Gret (Groupe de recherche et d'échanges technologiques); ADEMIR ROBERTO RUSCHEL, CPATU; Marcelo Santos-Melo, Serviço Florestal Brasileiro MMA/SFB; Driss Ezzine-de-Blas, CIRAD. |
|
Título: |
The contribution of multiple use forest management to small farmers' Annual Incomes in the Eastern Amazon. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2014 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Forests, v. 5, n. 7, p. 1508-1531, 2014. |
|
DOI: |
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f5071508 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
Small-scale farmers in the Brazilian Amazon collectively hold tenure over more than 12 million ha of permanent forest reserves, as required by the Forest Code. The trade-off between forest conservation and other land uses entails opportunity costs for them and for the country, which have not been sufficiently studied. We assessed the potential income generated by multiple use forest management for farmers and compared it to the income potentially derived from six other agricultural land uses. Income from the forest was from (i) logging, carried out by a logging company in partnership with farmers? associations; and (ii) harvesting the seeds of Carapa guianensis (local name andiroba) for the production of oil. We then compared the income generated by multiple-use forest management with the income from different types of agrarian systems. According to our calculations in this study, the mean annual economic benefits from multiple forest use are the same as the least productive agrarian system, but only 25% of the annual income generated by the most productive system. Although the income generated by logging may be considered low when calculated on an annual basis and compared to incomes generated by agriculture, the one-time payment after logging is significant (US$5,800 to US$33,508) and could be used to implement more intensive and productive cropping systems such as planting black pepper. The income from forest management could also be used to establish permanent fields in deforested areas for highly productive annual crops using conservation agriculture techniques. These techniques are alternatives to the traditional land use based on periodic clearing of the forest. Nevertheless, the shift in current practices towards adoption of more sustainable conservation agriculture techniques will also require the technical and legal support of the State to help small farmers apply these alternatives, which aim to integrate forest management in sustainable agricultural production systems. MenosSmall-scale farmers in the Brazilian Amazon collectively hold tenure over more than 12 million ha of permanent forest reserves, as required by the Forest Code. The trade-off between forest conservation and other land uses entails opportunity costs for them and for the country, which have not been sufficiently studied. We assessed the potential income generated by multiple use forest management for farmers and compared it to the income potentially derived from six other agricultural land uses. Income from the forest was from (i) logging, carried out by a logging company in partnership with farmers? associations; and (ii) harvesting the seeds of Carapa guianensis (local name andiroba) for the production of oil. We then compared the income generated by multiple-use forest management with the income from different types of agrarian systems. According to our calculations in this study, the mean annual economic benefits from multiple forest use are the same as the least productive agrarian system, but only 25% of the annual income generated by the most productive system. Although the income generated by logging may be considered low when calculated on an annual basis and compared to incomes generated by agriculture, the one-time payment after logging is significant (US$5,800 to US$33,508) and could be used to implement more intensive and productive cropping systems such as planting black pepper. The income from forest management could also be used to establish permanent fields in ... Mostrar Tudo |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Manejo florestal; Manejo florestal comunitário; Multiple-use forest management; Non-timber forest products; Produto florestal não-madeireiro; Small farming; Uso múltiplo. |
|
Thesagro: |
Agricultura Familiar. |
|
Thesaurus Nal: |
Amazonia; community forestry. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
K Ciência Florestal e Produtos de Origem Vegetal |
|
URL: |
https://ainfo.cnptia.embrapa.br/digital/bitstream/item/104131/1/forests-05-01508-v2.pdf
|
|
Marc: |
LEADER 03053naa a2200337 a 4500
001 1989173
005 2022-10-19
008 2014 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttp://dx.doi.org/10.3390/f5071508$2DOI
100 1 $aSIST, P.
245 $aThe contribution of multiple use forest management to small farmers' Annual Incomes in the Eastern Amazon.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2014
520 $aSmall-scale farmers in the Brazilian Amazon collectively hold tenure over more than 12 million ha of permanent forest reserves, as required by the Forest Code. The trade-off between forest conservation and other land uses entails opportunity costs for them and for the country, which have not been sufficiently studied. We assessed the potential income generated by multiple use forest management for farmers and compared it to the income potentially derived from six other agricultural land uses. Income from the forest was from (i) logging, carried out by a logging company in partnership with farmers? associations; and (ii) harvesting the seeds of Carapa guianensis (local name andiroba) for the production of oil. We then compared the income generated by multiple-use forest management with the income from different types of agrarian systems. According to our calculations in this study, the mean annual economic benefits from multiple forest use are the same as the least productive agrarian system, but only 25% of the annual income generated by the most productive system. Although the income generated by logging may be considered low when calculated on an annual basis and compared to incomes generated by agriculture, the one-time payment after logging is significant (US$5,800 to US$33,508) and could be used to implement more intensive and productive cropping systems such as planting black pepper. The income from forest management could also be used to establish permanent fields in deforested areas for highly productive annual crops using conservation agriculture techniques. These techniques are alternatives to the traditional land use based on periodic clearing of the forest. Nevertheless, the shift in current practices towards adoption of more sustainable conservation agriculture techniques will also require the technical and legal support of the State to help small farmers apply these alternatives, which aim to integrate forest management in sustainable agricultural production systems.
650 $aAmazonia
650 $acommunity forestry
650 $aAgricultura Familiar
653 $aManejo florestal
653 $aManejo florestal comunitário
653 $aMultiple-use forest management
653 $aNon-timber forest products
653 $aProduto florestal não-madeireiro
653 $aSmall farming
653 $aUso múltiplo
700 1 $aSABLAYROLLES, P.
700 1 $aBARTHELON, S.
700 1 $aSOUSA-OTA, L.
700 1 $aKIBLER, J.-F.
700 1 $aRUSCHEL, A.
700 1 $aSANTOS-MELO, M.
700 1 $aEZZINE-DE-BLAS, D.
773 $tForests$gv. 5, n. 7, p. 1508-1531, 2014.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Amazônia Oriental (CPATU) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
URL |
Voltar
|
|
|
 | Acesso ao texto completo restrito à biblioteca da Embrapa Solos. Para informações adicionais entre em contato com cnps.biblioteca@embrapa.br. |
Registro Completo
|
Biblioteca(s): |
Embrapa Solos. |
|
Data corrente: |
23/08/2016 |
|
Data da última atualização: |
09/11/2021 |
|
Tipo da produção científica: |
Artigo em Periódico Indexado |
|
Circulação/Nível: |
A - 1 |
|
Autoria: |
CLEMENT, C. R.; DENEVAN, W. M.; HECKENBERGER, M. J.; JUNQUEIRA, A. B.; NEVES, E. G.; TEIXEIRA, W. G.; WOODS, W. I. |
|
Afiliação: |
CHARLES R. CLEMENT, INPA; WILLIAM M. DENEVAN, UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN; MICHAEL J. HECKENBERGER, UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA; ANDRÉ BRAGA JUNQUEIRA, INPA; EDUARDO G. NEVES, USP; WENCESLAU GERALDES TEIXEIRA, CNPS; WILLIAM I. WOODS, UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS. |
|
Título: |
Response to comment by McMichael, Piperno and Bush. |
|
Ano de publicação: |
2015 |
|
Fonte/Imprenta: |
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: biological sciences, v. 282, n. 1821, 20152459, Dez. 2015. |
|
DOI: |
https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2459 |
|
Idioma: |
Inglês |
|
Conteúdo: |
We thank McMichael et al. for commenting on our recent review [1]. They focus on: our misinterpretation of their published data; use of data that is not pre-Conquest; and the extrapolative nature of our review. As they point out, we agree with them about heterogeneous landscape domestication across Amazonia, but we dis- agree with their conclusions about the extent to which forests were altered in western Amazonia and elsewhere [2,3]. As western Amazonia covers approxi- mately 2 000 000 km2, they are making a major statement. We consider their claim to be of an excessively 'extrapolative nature' given their data. |
|
Palavras-Chave: |
Fitólito. |
|
Thesagro: |
Carvão Vegetal. |
|
Thesaurus NAL: |
Amazonia. |
|
Categoria do assunto: |
P Recursos Naturais, Ciências Ambientais e da Terra |
|
Marc: |
LEADER 01346naa a2200241 a 4500
001 2051519
005 2021-11-09
008 2015 bl uuuu u00u1 u #d
024 7 $ahttps://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2015.2459$2DOI
100 1 $aCLEMENT, C. R.
245 $aResponse to comment by McMichael, Piperno and Bush.$h[electronic resource]
260 $c2015
520 $aWe thank McMichael et al. for commenting on our recent review [1]. They focus on: our misinterpretation of their published data; use of data that is not pre-Conquest; and the extrapolative nature of our review. As they point out, we agree with them about heterogeneous landscape domestication across Amazonia, but we dis- agree with their conclusions about the extent to which forests were altered in western Amazonia and elsewhere [2,3]. As western Amazonia covers approxi- mately 2 000 000 km2, they are making a major statement. We consider their claim to be of an excessively 'extrapolative nature' given their data.
650 $aAmazonia
650 $aCarvão Vegetal
653 $aFitólito
700 1 $aDENEVAN, W. M.
700 1 $aHECKENBERGER, M. J.
700 1 $aJUNQUEIRA, A. B.
700 1 $aNEVES, E. G.
700 1 $aTEIXEIRA, W. G.
700 1 $aWOODS, W. I.
773 $tProceedings of the Royal Society B: biological sciences$gv. 282, n. 1821, 20152459, Dez. 2015.
Download
Esconder MarcMostrar Marc Completo |
|
Registro original: |
Embrapa Solos (CNPS) |
|
|
Biblioteca |
ID |
Origem |
Tipo/Formato |
Classificação |
Cutter |
Registro |
Volume |
Status |
Fechar
|
| Nenhum registro encontrado para a expressão de busca informada. |
|
|
