Approches

From storylines to scenarios: raising awareness and decision support [Brésil]

approaches_2616 - Brésil

État complet : 89%

1. Informations générales

1.2 Coordonnées des personnes-ressources et des institutions impliquées dans l'évaluation et la documentation de l'Approche

Personne(s) ressource(s) clé(s)

Spécialiste GDT:
Spécialiste GDT:
Spécialiste GDT:

Gil Juliana

julianagil@uol.com.br

Embrapa Rice & Beans,

Brésil

Guggenberger Georg

Leibniz University Hannover

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Klingler Michael

University of Innsbruck

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Lakes Tobia

Humboldt-University Berlin

Spécialiste GDT:

Böhner Jürgen

University Hamburg

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Schaldach Rüdiger

University Kassel

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Siebold Matthias

University Hohenheim

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Nendel Claas

Leibniz Centre for Agricultural Landscape Research (ZALF)

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Schönenberg Regine

Free University Berlin

Allemagne

Spécialiste GDT:

Gerold Gerhard

Georg August University Göttingen

Allemagne

Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Carbon optimized land management strategies for southern Amazonia (CARBIOCIAL / GLUES)
Nom du projet qui a facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Book project: Making sense of research for sustainable land management (GLUES)
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Georg August Universität Göttingen (Georg August Universität Göttingen) - Allemagne
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Leibniz Institute for Regional Geography (IfL) - Allemagne
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Humboldt Universität zu Berlin (HU Berlin) - Allemagne
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Universität Kassel - Allemagne
Nom du ou des institutions qui ont facilité la documentation/ l'évaluation de l'Approche (si pertinent)
Universität Hamburg (UHH) - Allemagne

1.3 Conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées

Quand les données ont-elles été compilées (sur le terrain)?

18/06/2016

Le compilateur et la(les) personne(s) ressource(s) acceptent les conditions relatives à l'utilisation par WOCAT des données documentées:

Oui

1.4 Références au(x) questionnaire(s) sur les Technologies de GDT

2. Description de l'Approche de GDT

2.1 Courte description de l'Approche

Investigating viable carbon-optimized land management strategies, which maintain or improve ecosystem function, under changing climate conditions in the Southern Amazon - using regional scenarios generated from storylines.

2.2 Description détaillée de l'Approche

Description détaillée de l'Approche:

Aims / objectives: One objective of the Carbiocial project, in close cooperation with its Brazilian partner project Carbioma, is to explore how land use change in one of Brazil’s most dynamic regions will develop in the next 30 years and how it will be affected by the implementation of land-use planning options and conservation policies. For this purpose a set of scenarios was created. The scenarios portray different plausible development pathways for the region. Each scenario consists of a storyline: a brief narrative of the future. At this level farmers and institutions are involved. An expert panel translated the findings of several stakeholder workshops and extensive stakeholder and expert interviews, conducted in 2012, into qualitative information needed to elaborate these scenarios. Four storylines emerged: (1) “business-as-usual”; (2) sustainable, extensive use of the Amazon; (3) legal intensification; (3) illegal intensification.

Methods: It was agreed that the communication between qualitative social science data and quantitative data had to be considered carefully. A blend of the required input factors for the models was agreed as guiding principles for all storylines: these were: population, agrarian production, livestock, agrarian and environmental policies, protected areas, infrastructure, impact of climate change (mitigation/adaptation). In a second step, qualitative data had to be added to the models; to limit bias, all available German experts on Southern Amazonia participated in a day-long (and quite controversial) brainstorming session producing content for the four storylines.
After translating the results into Portuguese the outcome was discussed with representatives of government and NGOs to discuss their plausibility and to modify accordingly. The input of local stakeholders was included on the basis of discussions and qualitative interviews. Generally speaking, the feedback loops with Brazilian stakeholders’ happened rather arbitrarily. Participation could have been better if planned more methodically and earlier.
The three hypothetical storylines describe different pathways of future regional development within the two states. Due to the strong linkages of Southern Amazonia to global markets (e.g. exports of soybean and meat) it was necessary to portray this dependency as one important determinant within the scenarios. Also, law enforcement of the existing legal situation was considered: more than 40% of Amazônia comprises protected areas. In order to portray the possibility of progressive environmental and indigenous legislation, a vibrant civil society, and well-institutionalized public prosecutors, a sustainability scenario was designed.
The next step was the quantification of the qualitative information to facilitate a simulation-based scenario analysis. Simulation models will be combined as software packages to support the decision-taking process from local to landscape and regional scale. All research and implementation activities include direct involvement of the stakeholders. Field experiments for improving C storage and ecosystem function will be performed in cooperation with an NGO founded by the farmers of Mato Grosso.

Other important information: A set of land use maps was generated to depict scenarios from 2010 to 2030. The objective of this modelling and mapping exercise is to support decision-makers to better interpret the scenarios and their implications. These new layers of information will facilitate further model or GIS-based analysis of land use change impacts on the regional carbon balance and the loss of biodiversity, and may act as a test-bed for the development of strategies towards sustainable land management.

2.3 Photos de l'approche

2.5 Pays/ région/ lieux où l'Approche a été appliquée

Pays:

Brésil

Région/ Etat/ Province:

Mato Grosso/Pará, Brazil

2.6 Dates de début et de fin de l'Approche

Indiquez l'année de démarrage:

2011

Date (année) de fin de l'Approche (si l'Approche n'est plus appliquée):

2016

2.7 Type d'Approche

  • fondé sur un projet/ programme

2.8 Principaux objectifs de l'Approche

The Approach focused mainly on other activities than SLM (carbon-optimized land management)

The joint main goals are 1) to perform region-specific analyses in order to improve and apply interdisciplinary sets of models of land use impacts on carbon stocks, water and GHG balances, 2) to develop and optimize land management strategies that minimize carbon losses and GHG emissions, and maximize carbon sequestration, 3) to assess the trade-offs between land management options and socio-economic impacts in terms of GHG reduction, profitability, ecological sustainability, and last but not least, 4) to support the Brazilian partners to implement the optimal techniques in practice, considering the soybean value chain and overall carbon balance.

The SLM Approach addressed the following problems: High loss of vegetative and soil carbon due to agricultural expansion (deforestation), agricultural emissions, biodiversity loss.

2.9 Conditions favorisant ou entravant la mise en œuvre de la(des) Technologie(s) appliquée(s) sous l'Approche

normes et valeurs sociales/ culturelles/ religieuses
  • entrave

Acceptance of research results

Treatment through the SLM Approach: Dissemination of research results in the form of policy briefs (short graphical illustration of results) and “output-stick” (USB stick with more detailed research results).

cadre juridique (régime foncier, droits d'utilisation des terres et de l'eau)
  • entrave

Land tenure

Treatment through the SLM Approach: None

The existing land ownership, land use rights / water rights greatly hindered the approach implementation Especially in Pará, land tenure rights are uncertain and lead to land speculation with resultant land degradation and deforestation.

3. Participation et rôles des parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche

3.1 Parties prenantes impliquées dans l'Approche et rôles

  • exploitants locaux des terres / communautés locales
  • organisations communautaires

Indigenous groups were involved in stakeholder workshops with the aim of discussing different storyline options, and in the following feedback loops discussing the resulting storylines.

  • Spécialistes de la GDT/ conseillers agricoles
  • gouvernement national (planificateurs, décideurs)

planning authorities

3.2 Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales aux différentes phases de l'Approche
Participation des exploitants locaux des terres/ communautés locales Spécifiez qui était impliqué et décrivez les activités
initiation/ motivation interactive Land users and planning authorities; identification of research priorities, state-of-the-art of agricultural practices, identification of problems.
planification aucun
mise en œuvre aucun
suivi/ évaluation aucun
Research passive Research plots for demonstration.

3.3 Diagramme/ organigramme (si disponible)

Description:

The scenario building process. Qualitative scenarios (“storylines”) were developed by an expert panel and successively refined with feedback from regional stakeholders and project partners. In the second step the storylines were interpreted, quantified, and used for scenario building and analysis based on computer models.

3.4 Prises de décision pour la sélection de la Technologie/ des Technologies

Indiquez qui a décidé de la sélection de la Technologie/ des Technologies à mettre en œuvre:
  • principalement les spécialistes de la GDT, après consultation des exploitants des terres
Expliquez:

Decisions on the method of implementing the SLM Technology were made by by land users* alone (self-initiative / bottom-up)

4. Soutien technique, renforcement des capacités et gestion des connaissances

4.1 Renforcement des capacités/ formation

Une formation a-t-elle été dispensée aux exploitants des terres/ autres parties prenantes?

Oui

Spécifiez qui a été formé:
  • exploitants des terres
Formats de la formation:
  • entre agriculteurs (d'exploitants à exploitants)
  • zones de démonstration
  • réunions publiques
Thèmes abordés:

Training focused on raising awareness of the consequences of “business-as-usual” behavior compared with other scenarios.

4.2 Service de conseils

Les exploitants des terres ont-ils accès à un service de conseils?

Oui

Spécifiez si le service de conseils est fourni:
  • dans les champs des exploitants?
Décrivez/ commentez:

Name of method used for advisory service: dissemination of research results in the form of policy briefs and more detailed “output sticks”

Advisory service is quite adequate to ensure the continuation of land conservation activities

4.3 Renforcement des institutions (développement organisationnel)

Des institutions ont elles été mises en place ou renforcées par le biais de l'Approche?
  • non

4.4 Suivi et évaluation

Le suivi et l'évaluation font ils partie de l'Approche? :

Oui

Commentaires:

bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations
bio-physical aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through observations
socio-cultural aspects were ad hoc monitored by project staff through measurements
There were few changes in the Approach as a result of monitoring and evaluation: Dissemination; form of dissemination was adjusted according to the requirements of target groups.
There were no changes in the Technology as a result of monitoring and evaluation

4.5 Recherche

La recherche a-t-elle fait partie intégrante de l’Approche?

Oui

Spécifiez les thèmes:
  • écologie
  • technologie
Donnez plus de détails et indiquez qui a mené ces recherches:

Research was carried out both on station and on-farm

5. Financement et soutien matériel externe

5.1 Budget annuel de la composante GDT de l'Approche

Si le budget annuel précis n'est pas connu, indiquez une fourchette:
  • 100 000-1 000 000
Commentez (par ex. principales sources de financement/ principaux bailleurs de fonds):

Approach costs were met by the following donors: international (German Ministry of Education and Research BMBF): 100.0%

5.2 Soutiens financiers/ matériels fournis aux exploitants des terres

Les exploitants des terres ont-ils reçu un soutien financier/ matériel pour la mise en œuvre de la Technologie/ des Technologies?

Non

5.4 Crédits

Des crédits ont-ils été alloués à travers l'Approche pour les activités de GDT?

Non

6. Analyses d'impact et conclusions

6.1 Impacts de l'Approche

Est-ce que l'Approche a aidé les exploitants des terres à mettre en œuvre et entretenir les Technologies de GDT?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

Identification of method of applying organic matter to soil; identification of kind of agriculture most suitable for specific region/area; type of crop sown; crop sowing dates; economic return/economic optimization.

Est-ce que l'Approche a autonomisé les groupes socialement et économiquement défavorisés?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup
Est-ce que l'Approche a amélioré les questions foncières et des droits d'utilisation qui entravent la mise en œuvre des Technologies?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

Research had no effect on land tenure; research was not aimed at solving the problem, rather research helped to identify the problem. The problem is likely to be overcome in the near future. reforms of land tenure rights underway

Did other land users / projects adopt the Approach?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup
Did the Approach lead to improved livelihoods / human well-being?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup
Did the Approach help to alleviate poverty?
  • Non
  • Oui, un peu
  • Oui, modérément
  • Oui, beaucoup

6.2 Principale motivation des exploitants des terres pour mettre en œuvre la GDT

  • augmenter la production
  • augmenter la rentabilité/ bénéfice, rapport coûts-bénéfices
  • paiements/ subventions
  • règles et règlements (amendes)/ application
  • well-being and livelihoods improvement

6.3 Durabilité des activités de l'Approche

Les exploitants des terres peuvent-ils poursuivre ce qui a été mis en œuvre par le biais de l'Approche (sans soutien extérieur)?
  • oui
Si oui, décrivez de quelle manière:

No-till agriculture, crop rotations, recommended sowing dates, expanding agricultural land according to crop yield information, and information regarding negative effects of cropland/rangeland expansion (e.g. soil and site specific GHG emissions) which were identified through the different scenarios.

6.4 Points forts/ avantages de l'Approche

Points forts/ avantages/ possibilités du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé
improved choice of crop/crop rotation; more environmental friendly choice of kind of agriculture employed (agroforestry systems); improved awareness of existence and functionality of regulations in favor of sustainability better dissemination; heightened awareness of land users to sustainability topics and environmental degradation

6.5 Faiblesses/ inconvénients de l'Approche et moyens de les surmonter

Faiblesses/ inconvénients/ risques du point de vue du compilateur ou d'une autre personne ressource clé Comment peuvent-ils être surmontés?
Acceptance of results by famers, planning authorities, decision makers in general (political level).

7. Références et liens

7.1 Méthodes/ sources d'information

  • visites de terrain, enquêtes sur le terrain
  • interviews/entretiens avec les exploitants des terres

7.2 Références des publications disponibles

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

J. Goepel et al. (2016) Future scenarios of land-use and land-cover change in Southern Amazonia and resultant greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural soils, to be published in Regional Environmental Change Special Issue “Southern Amazonia”,(in review)

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

Schönenberg et al. (2016)Inter- and transdisciplinary scenario construction to explore future land use options in Southern Amazonia, to be published in Ecology & Society (in review)

Titre, auteur, année, ISBN:

R. Schaldach et al. (to be published) A multi-scale modelling framework for the analysis of societal and environmental processes in Southern Amazonian land systems: Lessons learned from the Carbiocial project.

Modules