Milk production is an important economic and social activity in Brazil. Failure to meet institutional and market demands for quality and sustainability has led farmers, particularly small-scale farmers, to leave agriculture. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the sustainability of dairy farms in Paraná, Brazil. A semi-structured questionnaire was administered to 75 dairy farm operators. Sustainability indicators were generated on the basis of economic, environmental and social data using exploratory factor analysis. Factor scores were subjected to hierarchical clustering, which resulted in the formation of three groups of dairy farms. Groups 1, 2 and 3 had high, intermediate and low levels of sustainability, respectively. Group 1 comprised large-scale dairy farms with high productivity. Dairy farms with intermediate sustainability (group 2) had medium production capacity, and farms with low sustainability (group 1) had the smallest production scale and capacity. Large-scale dairy farms have greater economic, environmental and social sustainability and are, therefore, more likely to survive in the medium and long term.

-Brazil is the fourth largest milk producer in the world. Besides its economic relevance, milk production has an important social function in Brazil. Dairy activity employs a large amount of people and contributes to regional development. But some drawbacks remain, such as poor labor conditions and problems for family succession. Labor conditions may be critical for successors to decide whether to remain in dairy activity. Paraná is the second largest milk producer in Brazil, mainly with smallholder family dairy systems. This paper aims to discuss labor conditions, family succession and structural features in Paraná's dairy activity. Our hypothesis is that family-based farms present poorer structure, poorer labor conditions and are less prone to family succession. The method comprised face-to-face interviews with 153 dairy farmers, in two groups: 117 family-based farms (Group 1) and 36 hired-labor farms (Group 2). Common factor analysis led to identify three factors: "structure", "labor conditions" and "individual conditions to family succession". Dairy farms in Group 1 present poorer structural and labor conditions, although being more prone to family succession, partially supporting our above hypothesis. Thus, structural features and labor conditions seem not to be the driving factors for the intent to family succession, which suggests the existence of other incentives. Results also indicate the need to improve labor conditions, especially for Group 1, since poor labor conditions may threaten family succession in the very long run. Efforts to improve family labor conditions are necessary to ensure long-term sustainability of dairy farming in Paraná State. Further studies could investigate social, market, technology and political features directing decision-making in family succession. Expanding the variables for labor conditions and structure, as well as including other social and behavioral factors, could put more light on the differences between dairy farms using and not using hired labor. Finally, a deeper investigation on reasons why family-based farmers do not promote better labor conditions is critical for the future of Paraná's dairy sector.

The objective of this study is to analyze the typology of dairy production systems (DPS) in Paraná, Brazil, based on sustainable practices adopted by agricultural producers. A total of 153 semi-structured questionnaires containing variables for general characterization of DPS, socioeconomic characteristics of farmers, as well as environmental, social, and economic sustainability actions implemented by rural workers were applied. Common factor analysis (CFA) was used to evaluate sustainability variables. Three factors were created: economic (F1), social (F2), and environmental (F3). Hierarchical clusters were formed using the factor scores obtained in CFA. Three clusters were defined and were compared with F1, F2, and F3. There were significant differences in F1 and F2 between clusters 1, 2, and 3. Cluster 1 contained DPS highly compliant with economic, social, and environmental sustainability practices. Cluster 2 was defined by DPS with negative mean values for all three factors. Cluster 3 contained DPS that were highly compliant with F1 and F2 activities compared to cluster 2 and poorly compliant with F1 and F2 actions compared to cluster 1. Therefore, the DPS in Paraná vary according to the sustainable activities implemented by farm managers. In addition, most analyzed DPS have low survival capacity in the medium- and long-term. The most critical sustainability factor was F3, followed by F2 and F1.

In the present study, we aimed to develop and apply a model to evaluate the social, economic, and environmental sustainability of dairy production systems (DPS). In addition, we sought to analyze structural and production characteristics of DPS of different sustainability levels. Semi-structured questionnaires were used to collect structural and production data as well as information on sustainability actions taken by rural producers in 152 DPS located in Paraná, Brazil. The proposed model was applied to analyze the data. Each DPS received a score to represent its level of social, environmental, and economic sustainability, and DPS with similar sustainability levels were grouped according to these indicators using hierarchical cluster analysis. Three groups were formed: G1, comprising the largest proportion of DPS (63.8%); G2 comprising 20.4% of DPS; and G3, comprising 15.8% of DPS. The mean values of the sustainability indicators of each group were compared to those of other groups using analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Tukey’s test. Subsequently, groups were analyzed in terms of structural and production characteristics. G2 was characterized by the highest levels of environmental, social, and economic sustainability. G1 had intermediate sustainability levels, and G3 achieved the worst results in the three sustainability indicators. The best sustainability performance of the three DPS groups was in the environmental dimension, followed by the economic dimension and lastly the social dimension. DPS with large-scale production and high productivity showed the highest sustainability indicators. The sustainability assessment model was suitable for DPS, having the advantages of being easy to apply, easy to interpret, and low cost.