Group Energy and Resources, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, Utrecht, 3584 CS, Netherlands; Tropenbos International, Lawickse Allee 11, Wageningen, 6701 AN, Netherlands.
Group Energy and Resources, Copernicus Institute of Sustainable Development, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, Utrecht, 3584 CS, Netherlands.
J Environ Manage. 2019 Jul 15;242:496-506. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2019.04.101. Epub 2019 May 7.
Smallholder farmers might adopt different farming practices to cope with multiple stressors depending on their livelihood assets, and with varying environmental and economic outcomes. Ongoing global change is triggering stronger and different stressors that threaten conventional farming practices; however, this could be resolved if livelihood assets that drive decision making are actionable and thus can be modified. This study assessed the influence of farmers' livelihood assets, risk perception, and shocks on the choice of non-conventional farming practices for smallholder coffee farmers in San Martín, Peru. Using household survey data, we collected data on 162 coffee plantations along an elevation gradient. We operationalized the sustainable livelihoods framework for the adoption of shade and input coffee farming strategies and explored farmers' motives to change them. Despite associated high risks with pest and disease pressure, coffee price volatility and climate change, these risks did not explain the current shade and input farming strategies. While in the past five years, farmers adapted shade and input management in response to pest and disease and climate change pressures, these occurred in diverging directions: we found higher human and social assets associated with higher shade levels, and a trend for higher physical and financial assets associated with higher input use. These findings illustrate that two main factors affect decisions on farming practices related to shade and input management and they relate to different livelihood capitals. This suggests a potential for conflicting decision-making, push-and-pulling decisions in different directions. Further the disconnect between livelihood assets and perceptions suggests that perception of risk and shocks might not be sufficient to motivate decision making under changing conditions. Such insights in decision-making typologies and drivers can inform the development of farming practices that enhance resilience and sustainability of smallholder coffee production in Peru and elsewhere in the tropics.
小农可能会根据生计资产采用不同的耕作方式来应对多种压力源，从而产生不同的环境和经济结果。当前，全球变化正在引发更强和更多样的压力源，威胁着传统的耕作方式；然而，如果驱动决策的生计资产具有可操作性，因而可以进行修改，那么这些问题是可以解决的。本研究评估了秘鲁圣马丁小农咖啡种植户的生计资产、风险认知和冲击对非传统耕作方式选择的影响。我们利用家庭调查数据，沿着海拔梯度收集了 162 个咖啡种植园的数据。我们将可持续生计框架应用于遮荫和投入咖啡种植策略的采用，并探讨了农民改变这些策略的动机。尽管与病虫害压力、咖啡价格波动和气候变化相关的风险很高，但这些风险并不能解释当前的遮荫和投入农业策略。尽管在过去五年中，农民为应对病虫害和气候变化的压力而调整了遮荫和投入管理，但这些变化的方向却不同：我们发现较高的人力和社会资产与较高的遮荫水平相关，而较高的物质和金融资产则与较高的投入使用呈趋势相关。这些发现表明，有两个主要因素影响着与遮荫和投入管理相关的耕作方式决策，这两个因素与不同的生计资本有关。这表明可能存在决策冲突，不同方向的推拉决策。此外，生计资产和认知之间的脱节表明，在变化的条件下，风险和冲击的认知可能不足以激发决策。这种对决策类型学和驱动因素的洞察可以为在秘鲁和热带其他地区提高小农咖啡生产的弹性和可持续性的农业实践的发展提供信息。
