Mapping future changes in livelihood security and environmental sustainability based on perceptions of small farmers in the Brazilian Amazon

Abstract

Arts. 2015. Mapping future changes in livelihood security and environmental sustainability based on perceptions of small farmers in the Brazilian Amazon. ABSTRACT. Deforestation is a widely recognized problem in the Brazilian Amazon. Small farmers play a key role in this process in that they earn their livelihood by ranching and farming. Many studies have addressed the link between deforestation and livelihood strategies adopted by small farmers. Most have focused on advanced monitoring systems, simulation models, and GIS approaches to analyze the interaction of both dimensions, i.e., livelihoods and forest cover change. Although the current toolbox of methods has proved successful in increasing our understanding of these interactions, the models and approaches employed do not consider small farmers' perspectives. On the assumption that local small farmers are agents of land-cover change, understanding how they perceive their own situation is essential to elucidate their actions. Our objective is to explore future changes in livelihood security and environmental sustainability as envisaged by local small farmers in the Brazilian Amazon. Previous livelihood cluster analysis of small farmers located in southeast Pará was integrated with fuzzy cognitive mapping to determine present perceptions and to explore future changes, using global scenarios downscaled to the local situation. Overall, system description differs only on details; all results indicate a strong trade-off between livelihood security and environmental sustainability in all livelihood systems, as identified by the small farmers. However, fundamentally different outcomes are obtained from the future analysis, depending on the livelihood strategy cluster. Achieving win-win outcomes does not necessarily imply a positive scenario, especially if small farmers are dependent on income transfers from the government to provide their livelihood.

Pathways for drought resilient livelihoods based on people’s perception

“…We, along with Kok (2009), Özesmi and Özesmi (2004), and Diniz et al (2015), agree that the pros of FCMs outweigh the cons, especially with regard to integrating data from multiple stakeholders with different standpoints.…”

“…The cause and effect interconnection between two concepts is described with weights having values in the range −1 to +1. The positive sign indicates a direct relationship between variables and the negative sign an inverse relationship (Özesmi and Özesmi 2004;Jetter and Kok 2014;Diniz et al 2015;Nápoles et al 2016).…”

“…The main drawbacks of FCMs are: (i) the respondents' fallacies as misconceptions and biases get encoded in the maps (Özesmi and Özesmi 2004); (ii) FCM simulated results are relative and not real-value parameter estimates (Kim and Lee 1998;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004); (iii) they do not yield data with respect to a timeframe (Schneider et al 1998;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004); and (iv) require a large amount of post-processing time (Diniz et al 2015).…”

“…The main advantages that FCMs have over other tools like structural equation modelling, (SEM), systems dynamics model, and causal loop diagrams are: (i) their participatory nature that allow them to utilize the perception of stakeholders (Vliet et al 2009;Diniz et al 2015); (ii) they can model complex systems with many concepts-even those dealing with uncertainty (Kosko 1986;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004); (iii) they are not driven by data unavailability (Kok 2009;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004) but generate data on the other hand; (iv) they highlight and reveal the role of hidden and important feedbacks in the system (Kok 2009;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004); (v) they can easily integrate data from multiple sources and can divulge several diverging viewpoints (for example, they can use expert opinion as well as indigenous knowledge (Özesmi and Özesmi 2004)); and (vi) enable multiple policy simulations (Kok 2009;Özesmi and Özesmi 2004).…”

“…The fuzzy cognitive maps (FCMs) capture stakeholders' knowledge, perceptions, and beliefs for evidence-based decision-making in environmental planning and management (Jetter and Kok 2014), and allow modelling of the interaction between natural and human systems Diniz et al 2015). FCMs are highly flexible and cater to a wide spectrum of user groups (Jetter and Kok 2014).…”