No-tillage system participatory quality index

Abstract

The no-tillage system participatory quality index aims to evaluate the quality and efficiency of soil management under no-tillage systems and consists of a weighted sum of eight indicators: intensity of crop rotation, diversity of crop rotation, persistence of crop residues in the soil surface, frequency of soil tillage, use of agricultural terraces, evaluation of soil conservation, balance of soil fertilization and time of adoption of the no-tillage system. The aim of this study was to assess the extent to which these indicators correlate with the no-tillage system participatory quality index and to characterize the farmers who participated in the research. The data used were provided by ITAIPU Binacional for the indicators of the no-tillage system participatory quality index II. Descriptive analyses were performed, and the Pearson correlation coefficient between the index and each indicator was calculated. To assess the relationship between the indicators and the farmers’ behavior toward the indicators, principal component analysis and cluster analysis were performed. Although all correlations are significant at p-value ≤ 0.05, some correlations are weak, indicating a need for improvement of the index. The principal component analysis identified three principal components, which explained 66% of the variability of the data, and the cluster analysis separated the 121 farmers into five groups. It was verified that the no-tillage system participatory quality index II has some limitations and should therefore be reevaluated to increase its efficiency as an indicator of the quality of the no-tillage system.

Integrated Use of Local and Technical Soil Quality Indicators and Participatory Techniques to Select Them. A Review of Bibliography and Analysis of Research Strategies and Outcomes

“…The soil depth from which a fully grown plant can extract water and nutrients Ecosystem resilience to drought [10] MANAGEMENT (8) Plant density (R) Number of plants per square meter [35,40] Crop performance (R) General evaluation that can include yield, growth rate, crop status [29] Field type (P) Classification based on production activities, resource allocation and management practices [33] Cropping history (P) Record of the crops cultivated on the land in the previous years [10] Intensity of crop rotation (P) Years before a crop is planted again in the same field [39] Diversity of crop rotation (P) Number of different crops in a rotation [39] Sowing date (P)…”

“…Yield (R) Amount of an agricultural product harvested per unit of land area [10,14,23,29,35,40] Fertility (P)…”

“…The ability of soil to sustain plant growth and optimize crop yield [23] Primary productivity (R) Rate at which plants and other photosynthetic organisms produce organic compounds in an ecosystem [40] Presence of physical barriers (P) Presence of rocks or other impediments [23] Lack of knowledge and skills on soil fertility management (P)…”

“…Some studies used an ethno-pedological approach: researchers studied the local system of soil classification, including its local nomenclature [16,23,36,43], and eventually compared it to the international classification [15,31,40], from which they were able to derive further information. Conversely, researchers may identify a suitable set of local indicators with which classify soils; they then put to scrutiny the classification thus obtained with the aid of technical indicators [16,26,27,40] or compare it to an alternative classification built with technical parameters obtained through soil analysis [10,14,25]. Another approach starts by studying local perceptions [17,24,25] or local indicators for a given issue [26,36] and puts them directly to scrutiny using scientific concepts.…”

“…Where soil sampling and chemical analyses were carried out, there were different ways to choose the sampling design: in some cases farmers were asked to point out their best and poorest soils [17,25,26,28,36], so sampling decisions were totally up to them. Another approach was to put together information gathered previously by researchers with the outcomes of the participatory activities [15,16,24,27,40]. Finally, in some cases the sampling was, however, entirely designed by researchers following technical notions [14,31,38].…”