Individuals or associations?
Shifting cultivation is a polemic topic as it involves environmental and social aspects which affects the life of many small farmers around the world. There are concerns about deforestation and biodiversity, as well as food provision, and the production of charcoal by farmers to provide for their fa...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Second cycle, A2E |
| Lenguaje: | sueco Inglés |
| Publicado: |
2017
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://stud.epsilon.slu.se/10160/ |
| Sumario: | Shifting cultivation is a polemic topic as it involves environmental and social aspects which affects the life of many small farmers around the world. There are concerns about deforestation and biodiversity, as well as food provision, and the production of charcoal by farmers to provide for their families. The illegality of the slash and burn practices causes them problems with state’s institutions. Researchers who have formerly investigated the situation of farmers working with slash and burn take different positions about environment and social aspects of the situation and there has not been extensive work in bringing actors involved to work together. In a community in the south of Brazil, a group of farmers has been given a new procedure to legalize their work in the municipality they live and started an association, nevertheless they still face problems, moreover in the same community farmers working illegally are still many. This case attempted to gather actors to discuss and propose improvements for the situation of the farmers and uses Soft System Methodology. To investigate the issues, interviews were performed and meetings arranged. Written material was also studied to complement the data. After this first phase, a graphical representation of the situation was made and based on that, the work proceeded with meetings with the actors to identify and prioritize main issues. The result was proposals for improvement in coordination of activities and resources, together with close cooperation among farmers and state institutions. The proposals chosen suggested that a more coordinated and communicative action between farmers and institutions is the best way forward however underlying issues were identified and could be an obstacle for the improvements. The overall conclusion is that the intervention succeeded in gathering the actors to discuss together and to propose changes nevertheless decision making to approve the changes is still an issue. In addition, communication is affected by historical and cultural factors unfamiliar to the involved. |
|---|