J.N.Landers – specialist in natural resources management.

The Brazilian ZT technology has arisen as a farmer-driven response to their own and society’s desire to achieve economic development and poverty alleviation, combined with sustainable, and increasingly communal, management of the nation’s natural resources. It is certainly the best current alternative to achieve these goals in the humid and sub-humid tropics, but requires more development in the semi-arid and arid tropics, where pastoralism and irregular rainfall are major obstacles to maintaining soil cover. On Brazilian farms, it has led to the proffesionalization of the farmer as a manager and to higher skills development in rural manpower, to higher intensity of cropping and yield improvements. There is a knock-on effect towards a wider appreciation of the environment, reductions in input utilization per ton of product and a propensity to adopt biological controls.

The wide-ranging impacts of ZT and associated natural resource management strategies extend far beyond the farm boundaries into the very fabric of society, in a totally new dimension, which integrates the farmer’s activities into the very fabric of society, into those of society, through the positive implications which this new technology has for the environment, food security and water resources for the urban population, longer lives for hydroelectric reservoirs, lower costs for water treatment and rural road maintenance, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, dust pollution in the atmosphere and flood intensities. It is a story of farmer persistence and empowerment, community resource management and farmer/private sector/government partnerships which have engendered a new philosophy for really sustainable agricultural systems at high production levels, with considerable positive impact on farm incomes and quality of life, especially at the small farm level, where levels of reduction in labor demands and drudgery in manual and animal traction operations is dramatic. This paper examines the mechanisms and motivations which made possible the conversion of today nearly nine million hectares (`nearly 25% of the country total for annual crops) into ZT, mostly within the last 8 years.

ANALYTICAL BACKGROUND

The early pioneer farmers were motivated either by conscience or necessity; both triggered by high erosion losses. It also is notable that ZT was slower to occur in areas of fertile soils, like North and West Paraná and central São Paulo, because farm incomes took longer to reach critical levels under adverse government farm policy (cheap food imports and strategic sale of government stocks depressing commodity prices, reduced availability of working capital credit, punitive - if not immoral - cost of agricultural credit and removal of price supports).

Until the 1999 devaluation of the Brazilian currency, the Zero Tillage technology had been refined to the point that adoption had become a financially attractive route for farmers to increase net farm income (de Melo, 1999; Landers et al. 1994, de Abreu e Ferreira, 1999). Today, Brazilian farmers are taking stock of possible increases of over 50% in imported high-tech inputs, with a high degree of uncertainty on future returns to any farming system without export products. Higher input costs are only partly counterbalanced in Zero Tillage by increases in fuel costs under conventional tillage (CT). This could tip the balance for the most recent Zero Tillage adopters to revert to CV. There are also some pest and disease challenges, which are more serious, but already under study by researchers and plant breeders from private and state sectors. The resistant variety response to stem canker (Yorinori, 1992) in soya was extremely rapid and most farmers only suffered yield depressions for one, or two, years. However, as Franke Dijkstra, president of the Batavo Cooperative in Carambei – PR (99% in Zero Tillage, the exception being potatoes) told the members of the IBRD/FEBRAPDP Study Tour, in November 1998, "in Zero Tillage, we have many problems, BUT we have many more solutions", in a demonstration of that quality of persistence, so necessary to make the system work.

There are two dichotomies in the Brazilian Zero Tillage experience. First, between the three southern states (two thirds of the total ZT area) and the rest of Brazil, with Mato Grosso do Sul somewhere in between. This breaks down roughly into the sub-tropics and the tropics. The tropical region of Brazil lagged some ten years on the South in the development of Zero Tillage. This was chiefly because the cover crop technology from the sub-tropics was not generally adapted to the tropics (winter rainfall and frost as opposed to essentially frost-free dry winters) and also because government research did not prioritize ZT.

The second dichotomy is between small farmers (using low to medium levels of inputs and manual, animal traction or mechanized planting with family labor) and medium and large mechanized farmers (using medium to high inputs, mechanized planting, mainly with employed labor). The widespread myth that "Zero Tillage is for big farmers" held back attempts to develop the system for small farmers, now very successful. (Ribeiro, 1998).

Even in 1990, there was an insignificant area of ZT in Brazil’s small farm sector. Although the basic principles of crop rotation, herbicides and cover crops were broadly applicable, the planting technology for manual and animal traction had not been developed. In this case, it was pioneer research in the states of Paraná, Santa Catalina and Rio Grande do Soul (IAPAR, EPAGRI, EmbrapaCNPT) and small manufacturing firms directed specifically towards the small farm situation, which resolved the problems of adapting the planting technology to the small scale. Small farm adoption in the sub-tropics lagged on the medium/large farm sector by over ten years because of this constraint. In the tropical region, researchers have only recently begun to address the small farm ZT technology (APDC, 1997).

Early experience in Paraná with physical soil conservation barriers on a microcatchment basis – 1970’s and 80’s gave rise to the Paraná Rural Project in 1989 preceded by the national Microbacias project of the Ministry of Agriculture in 1987. This experience consecrated the use of the microcatchment as the planning/execution unit for sustainable natural resources management. Paraná Rural envolved from a pure soil barrier approach to an integrated soil management approach to erosion control, where Zero Tillage became the key.

Government extension support for Zero Tillage was initially limited by the fact that extension services felt reluctance to recommend a non-official technology. Although dessicant herbicides as such had been approved for use, there was a lag in approval of Zero Tillage as a planting system. There is also a very natural resistance to change amongst researchers, extensionists and teaching staff; re-gearing to the new technology requires extra effort and scepticism was prevalent towards Zero Tillage. These restrictions have been a major limiting factor in the Cerrado region, where, until 1998, only the extension service in Mato Grosso do Sul firmly recommended Zero Tillage. The Bank of Brazil in Goiás state, resolved the credit impasse for the principal crops by accepting the technology when recommended by an agronomist, having already approved credit for Zero Tillage in second cropping in 1992 (Neis, 1992). In 1996, the president of Embrapa publicly recognised that research had lagged farmer practice and exhorted researchers to catch up (Portugal, 1997). Zero Tillage technology was also seen by some as increasing the oligopoly of multinational firms in the Brazilian agribusiness sector.

Zero tillage has been a major factor in changing the top-down nature of agricultural services to farmers towards a participatory on-farm approach.

Today, the technology gap between technicians and farmers’ has narrowed. The adoption of Zero Tillage requires systems approach rather than line interventions. Effective communication with farmers under the new approach must be horizontal. Through this participatory approach technicians have come to appreciate the value of the farmer’s judgement in evaluating a farming system and its components (Ribeiro, 1998) – something with so many variables that, even with a modern computer, the technician could easily arrive at a wrong conclusion.

INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK FOR ZT EXPANSION

Farmer Organizations Involved in Zero Tillage and Community Management of Natural Resources

Assuming that local on-farm research has produced adapted technology acceptable to farmers, leadership capacity and sources of funding are the two most important factors affecting the success of farmer organizations in Zero Tillage dissemination. State or private sectors can supply the latter, ad hoc, the farmer usually comes from a farmer.

The following non-exhaustive list of farmers’ organizations involved in the dissemination of sustainable natural resource management activities, principally Zero Tillage, at various levels, indicates that operational arrangements must be extremely flexible, more especially at the municipality and microcatchment levels.

Microcatchment level

(i) Farmer microcatcment groups or associations for community projects (all farmers);

(ii) Small farmer credit groups( all farmers).

Municipal Level

(i) Agricultural Development Councils or Soil Commissions - (all farmers’ organizations and others);

(ii) Farmers’ Unions (commercial farmers of all sizes);

(iii) Rural Workers’ Unions (small subsistence farmers and farm workers);

(iv) Clubes Amigos da Terra - CAT (small, medium, and large farmers, Zero Tillage adopters);

(v)Specialized growers and livestock associations (all farmers, medium/large predominating);

(vi)Farmer Cooperatives (all farmers).

Multi-municipality level

1. Large cooperatives (input and food supply, credit, technical assistance, product marketing, research – all sizes of farmer);

2. Farmer foundations (applied research and technical assistance, medium/large farmers).

(i) Basin Committees for all water users (incipient and based on operational funds derived    from water tax, not yet implemented).

State Level or Regional Level

1. State Zero Tillage Associations (states of RS, PR, MS);

2. Cerrado Zero Tillage Association (APDC);

3. Federations of Farmers’ Unions;

4. Federations of cooperatives ;

5. Federations of Rural Workers’ Unions.

1. Federação Brasileira de Associações de Plantio Direto na Palha (FEBRAPDP)

2. Confederations of above organizations

The complex relationship of these entities with other sectors is shown in figure 1.

TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER

A variety of institutional arrangements have participated in transferring the Zero Tillage technology to farmers: The formula is ad hoc, where locally the most appropriate combination of entities emerges, through practical considerations. Examples of these are listed below:

- NGO network: FEBRAPDP and its 60-affiliate entities Brazil-wide (farmers’ organizations, agribusiness, government and universities);

- Private sector agribusiness product marketing and technical support – countrywide;

- State government extension services with IBRD funding – Land Management I and II projects in Rio Grando do Sul and Santa Catarina, Paraná Rural and Paraná 12 Meses projects;

- Clubes Amigos da Terra with private sector support – Rio Grande do Sul, other states and Cerrado region (municipal level);

- Farmer-owned foundations doing adaptive research and extension, e.g., Fundação ABC (Castro - PR), FUNDACEP (Cruz Alta - RS), Fundação MS (Maracaju – MS) (regional level);

- Cooperative technical departments (municipal level);

- Independent private agronomists acting individually (employed as consultants);

- Partnerships between private sector and state or federal government – PRO-PALHA, Santa Catarina (EPAGRI) and METAS Rio Grando do Sul (Embrapa Trigo, Emater – RS, Embrapa CPACT and the Federal University of Pelotas – RS) Animal Traction in Paraná (EMATER -PR/IAPAR/FEBRAPDP) projects;

- Farmer-owned foundations of seed producers – Fundação MT – Rondonópolis/MT, Fundação Cerrados Brasília/DF, FAPCEN – Balsas/MA and others;

- Agronomists and specialised farmers’ associations;

- Universities and technical colleges.

Some examples of these arrangements are analyzed below.

The Brazilian national ZT federation (FEBRAPDP) was founded in 1992 with the sole aim of promoting Zero Tillage and has been leading efforts to expand ZT in Brazil in a private sector/government coordinating role. It has signed cooperation agreements with the Ministry of Agriculture and Supply, with the Paraná state research institute (IAPAR) and the Paraná Extension service (EMATER). Its directors are much in demand at seminars and field days and their contributions are voluntary. Affiliated state associations exist in RS, PR and MS, while the Zero Tillage Association for the Cerrado Region (APDC) covers nine Cerrado states. Municipal Clubes Amigos da Terra (Friends of the Land Clubs), or other NGO entities promoting Zero Tillage, exist in over 80 municipalities in Brazil, not counting cooperatives and small farmer associations (which were formed for group extension, many of which actively promote Zero Tillage in the South of the country). The federation has played a major role in organizing national ZT events with its affiliates, sponsoring technical publications and training courses and liaising with government. It is affiliated to CAAPAS (the Confederation of Associations for Sustainable Agriculture in the Américas), of which Mr. Manoel H. Pereira , founding president of FEBRAPDP is currently the president. The organogram below indicates the relationship of FEBRAPDP to other ZT NGOs which ensures international and intra-national exchange of technical information.

In the medium/large farm sector, agribusiness companies, farmer NGOs, other farmer organizations and independent agronomists have been the principal moving force for dissemination of the technology. Farmer-organized national ZeroTillage meetings were held in Paraná (1981, 1983 and 1985), Rio Grande do Sul (1994), Goiás (1996) and Brasília (1998) with an aggregate of over 8000 participants. Countless local events and field days were organised by a variety of actors, most with some level of private sector support, and to a lesser extent from government entities. FEBRAPDP has organized three small farm on Zero Tillage meetings and specialized research events in Zero Tillage started in 1996 (Peixoto e Castro filho, 1996).

Over this period researchers contributed more and more to the results and the tropical technology developed rapidly after about 1992.

CATs in Rio Grande do Sul State – an NGO network

Modeled on the success of the informal Clube da Minhoca (the Earthworm Club) founded in 1979 in Ponta Grossa, Paraná State, this movement started in Rio Grande do Sul in 1982 with private sector support. Today there is a total of 43 clubs at municipality level, with an estimated number of some 4000 members. In 1994, the CAT Cruz Alta RS organized the 4^th National ZT Meetings with a 30 hectare demonstration field and over 2000 participants (8000 visits to the field). The ZT area in RS grew from less than 250,000 ha in 1992/3 to 3.8 million hectares in 1997/8 (EMATER-RS) of summer-planted area; part of this growth was also due to the Projeto METAS Embrapa CNPT/EMATER-RS/Embrapa-CPACT/UFPL and 7 private sector firms.).

Monthly meetings to exchange experiences and receive technical information have led to an evolution to other activities, especially in training rural labor and farm managers. Although the extension service (EMATER-RS) did not initially work with the CATs, there has been an approximation over time and now there is close collaboration; extensionists have even been elected president of some clubs. The need for a minimal organizational backup can often be better served by an extensionist than a busy farmer, and provided the extensionist acts in the direct interests of the farmer, this arrangement can work well. The vice-president of FEBRAPDP for Rio Grande do Sul is appointed at a statewide CAT meeting and represents the RS state CATs association at national level.

Box 1. ACTIVITIES of CATs :

Clube da Minhoca and Fundação ABC – Farmer’s Club to Foundation

Initial government research on Zero Tillage (IAPAR and IPEAME - Min. Agriculture, Ponta Grossa -PR) was on-station and did not produce results of direct interest to farmers’ operational problems. In 1984, this prompted the conversion of the "Clube da Minhoca", founded in 1979, in Ponta Grossa – PR to Fundação ABC, based on three local cooperatives. With a Dutch Zero Tillage specialist, this work was expanded to the area of adaptive research, with extension of results to cooperative members.

Today, the ten technicians of Fundação ABC cover over 1800 farmers (150.000 ha) who pay US$ 4 ha/year for these services – other funds are generated from the private sector (for product testing), the National Research Council (CNPq) and own-generated produce. Other activities have included field days, training courses, practical publications and organization of specialized events. (ABC, 1998)

The Santa Catarina Experience – Integrated Government Assistance to Small Farmers – Land Management Project II

This project uses the microcatchment as the operating unit; in SC research and extension have been fused in EPAGRI. Similar land management projects exist in Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul states. By about 1980, the soil-mining pioneer phase of small farmer agriculture in SC, often on very steep, erodible, slopes were becoming unsustainable. After two disastrous years of heavy rain and the worst erosion ever seen in the state, in 1984, three pilot projects were set up in microcatchments to develop the best technology for soil conservation and other sustainable practices, building on existing research and farmer experience with green manure cover crops. The table below describes the steps in the Ribeirão das Pedras microcatchment which led to widespread adoption of Zero Tillage, In an evaluation after ten years, corn yields were shown to have risen from 3 to 5 ton/ha, soya from 2.8 to 4.7 ton/ha, labor demands per hectare were more than halved and net farm income rose significantly ( de Freitas 1997). Cover crops had been introduced to protect the soil and facilitate Zero Tillage. This author reports "maintaining soil cover is more important in preventing erosion than contour bunds and soil conservation barriers"

Table 3. Actions in the Development and Dissemination of Zero Tillage and Community Management of Other Natural Resources in a Pilot Microcatchment in Santa Catarina State, Brasil. (Ribeirão das Pedras )

Fonte: de Freitas (1997).

During the 1998 Study Tour visit to this microcatchment farmers indicated that they had done away with their contour bunds, even on slopes of up to 50%.. The agronomists do not recommend such elimination on slopes of over 15%, but the farmers were adamant that they had no erosion problems. This situation is replicated in other regions of Brazil, where farmers with 5 or more years in Zero Tillage, where infiltration rates and soil cover have been considerably enhanced. The implication in project design is that where farmers on hilly land do not have contour bunds, terraces or barriers, it is far more cost-effective to convert immediately to Zero Tillage and not penalise the farmer with an investment which soon becomes obsolete. Farmers who have terraces merely omit maintenance and they slowly disappear.

The Pro-Palha Project complements Land Management II and was initiated in 1998 on a partnership basis with 7 agribusiness firms and two cooperatives. The target is to convert an additional 225,000 ha to Zero Tillage in West SC at a cost of about US$ 1.50 per hectare. It is specifically targeted towards Zero Tillage and based on the small watershed and farmer association approach to community management of natural resources. EPAGRI acts through farmer associations in each micro-catchment. This approach must take into account all sizes of farm and can serve as a basis for future representation on river basin committees for user management of the allocation of water resources. Under the Brazilian Water Resources Secretariat SRH/MMA’s new policy the formation of these committees is seen as the empowerment mechanism of water users through the movement "Cidadania pelas Águas (Citizens for Water). Through working agreements, or "convênios", EPAGRI works with municipal authorities which currently pay for 120 extensionists in a state total of 250 in 1999

The Cerrado Zero Tillage Association (APDC).

Actions have concentrated on :

• support for existing CATs and the creation of new ones;

• liaison with Embrapa, state research/extension entities, universities, farmer organisations and the private sector;

• organisation of technical events ;

• technical publications for farmers and the general public;

• support to FEBRAPDP

• training and on-farm research activities with CATs and state extension services

Direct Private Sector Support

In 1992 a group of large input suppliers formed a pool to support the spread of Zero Tillage, with a major effort in the Cerrado region, between 1992 and 1998, including, about 24 regional meetings of two or more days, hundreds of field days and publication of technical and commercial literature. Considerable support was also given by this group and individual companies to promotional activities all over the country. Actions in 1999 are focused on assisting the São Paulo state government’s "Extension Coordination Unit" (CATI) in a campaign to re-train extensionists, re-orient research and spread Zero Tillage. A US$7,000 prize for the best farmer/technician combination in technology innovation in the Cerrado was initiated in 1998. Today, the "Grupo Plantio Direto" has 10 member firms from fertilizer, herbicide, seed and machinery sectors affiliated to FEBRAPDP.

In the tropics, official extension and research did not contribute significantly to the spread of Zero Tillage, which was due mainly to the efforts of farmers bringing basic ZT technology and philosophy from the South, stimulated by herbicide, fertilizer and machinery firms and two on-farm research/action projects (Séguy, Bouzinac et al. 1992 and Vasconcelos and Landers, 1993). Collating this information with farmer experience and the few research results which were applicable APDC (founded in 1992) launched a comprehensive technical how-to-do-it publication (Landers, 1994), funded by agribusiness. Commercial product literature for dessicant and post-emergent herbicides and ZT planters/drills was also an important factor. Private sector initiatives were over whelming responsible for the spread of Zero Tillage in the Cerrado Region

Technology Generation and Adaptation

The aggregated contributions of individual farmers have probably constituted the most important factor in development of the ZT technology. By experimenting with different agronomic techniques and equipment modifications, referring problem areas to research; this is more and more, through farmer-owned foundations, CATs and other NGOs executing on-farm research in partnership with agribusiness, research organizations and universities. The principle of farmer-led demand has been the most efficient route to workable and profitable farming practices in ZT.

In the South of Brazil (PR, SC, RS) a major research effort was led by the Instituto Agronômico do Paraná (IAPAR), publishing the first comprehensive ZT research bulletin, emphasizing rotations and cover crops (Iapar, 1981) and followed by the work of farmer–owned foundations which arose to five the gap between research and farmers practice. (Fundação ABC, FUNDACEP, and recently many others), EMPASC and ACARESC (now incorporated into EPAGRI) and the Embrapa centres for wheat (Embrapa - Wheat, Passo Fundo, RS), CPAO, Dourado – MS irrigated rice (CPACT - Pelotas RS) and in soya (Embrapa - Soya, Londrina PR) many other publications followed with data from the sub-tropics.. IAPAR also pioneered government/agribusines partnerships in ZT, (ICI Brasil signed two research contracts in 1976 and 1981) outside the ambit of normal product testing and international collaboration with GTZ, in 1977 and also with CIDA aimed at systems research and, which were fundamental in supporting this early research. Later private sector support for research has came from most major agribusiness companies.

An important lesson here is that the development of the basic technology in the medium/large farm sector allows the technology to be transferred on to the small farm sector with only a small incremental cost in adaptive research. Medium/large farmer NGO’s have taken it upon themselves to actively promote ZT with small farmers (FEBRAPDP, APDC, and CAT Rio Verde), showing a social integration dimension engendered by the new attitudes which the ZT philosophy embodies.

The weight of farmer demands led by APDC and FEBRAPDP led to Embrapa determining ZT as an overall priority in 1996 and in 1998 an internal HQ working group was set up to ensure implementation of this priority. In 1998 these initiatives resulted in the national research council CNPq, jointly organizing a workshop with APDC and FEBRAPDP and all pertinent agents represented, exclusively to determine research priorities through identifying the main constraints in the ZT production chain. This leads to a proposal for clear focusing of research grants towards the major constraints. Direct private sector support has been given to Zero Tillage research projects in universities, farmer organizations, including CATs, Embrapa and state research programs. One example follows:

CIRAD - CA and Private Sector Entities - On-farm research & Action Project

Since 1986, a two-man French team and the collaborators has carried out on-farm research on large 1 ha plots using, farmer’s own machinery, which makes positive results immediately applicable. Their work has been fundamental to Zero Tillage advances in the Cerrado region, first with soya, sorghum and millet and later with cotton and rainfed rice (Sérguy, Bouzanic et al., 1996, 1997 ) and articles in Direto no Cerrado nos. 6 (1997) and 11 (1999). This has been a most thorough Systems approach, with wide adoption mainly through farmer-to-farmer contacts and field days, at very low cost. The fact the private sector financial support has been considerable is linked to the correct identification of farmer demands and the short time, usually 3 years, to usable recommendations. The normal technology validation trials to translate small plot work to farmer practice can be skipped. Rainfed rice yields of over 5 ton/ha have been achieved by farmers with premium grain quality and similar top yields obtained in other crops, at lower production costs than in conventional tillage (Séguy, Bouzinac et al, 1993).

PRE-CONDITIONS, MECHANISMS AND MOTIVATION FOR CHANGE

The spread of Zero Tillage in Brazil has been based on :

1. Prior on farm technology development by technicians and farmers, often assisted by commercial firms;

2. Supporting research from state and federal entities and farmer-owned foundations;

3. Private sector and NGO dissemination to medium/large farmers’ clubs, cooperatives and associations, where farmer-to-farmer contact was the main element;

4. Specific adaptive research programs for small-farm technology, with quick payouts;

5. Government extension and NGO actions with small farmer associations and clubs where again, farmer-to-farmer contact was important;

6. Heavy private sector and government investment in training of technicians and lead farmers.

7. Promotional actions to prepare the minds of farmers and technicians for change, including raising awareness of Zero Tillage benefits.

Adoption of the new paradigms of Zero Tillage requires revelation. It implies a total change in the base values of how to plant crops and manage soil. For this reason, a fellow farmer who has done it and made money or reduced drudgery is by the best extension agent. Promoting farmer interchange is a crucial ingredient for Zero Tillage adoption. The principal mechanisms involved in the adoption of ZT were :

• farmer-to-farmer contact (coubtrywide);;

• extension activities (RS, SC, PR, MS mainly in the 1990’s plus SP from 1998 onwards);

• commercial and NGO-sponsored events and small farmer pilot projects(countrywide);;

• technical assistance/promotion activities of herbicide firms )countrywide);

• private and cooperative technical assistance (countrywide);

• NGO/government/private-sector publications;

• press and television reports and

• small financial inducements (SC, RS, PR, plus SP in 1998)

In this process, isolated efforts by farmers and researchers did not cause notable impact until the farmer NGO or other farmer – based organization dimension was added.

The above analysis of the mechanisms and institutional framework which brought about adoption indicate clearly the critical areas for support which can accelerate adoption in other countries.

Adapted Technology On-farm

Lack of adapted technology can cause initial failures, which limits adoption for years (testimony of Paraná farmer, Tupassi PR, 1998). On-farm participative research work must focus initially on crop rotations, dessicant (and other) herbicides, cover crops and planter design. Perception of Zero Tillage as a large farmer technology designed to benefit multinational herbicide firms has, in the past, caused decision-makers to go slow on support.

In a region where Zero Tillage was just beginning two thirds of respondents to the question why farmers do not adopt Zero Tillage indicated insufficient on zero technology of the technology on fear of getting it wrong. Raising awareness of benefits and technical training are required to overcome these constraints.

Credit

Non-availability of credit because the technology is not approved is another possible constraint to early adoption. Lack of cover crop seeds requires special incentives such as grants for organization of seed producer associations and assistance in marketing ( Land. Mgt. II SC and Paraná – Rural). Lack of acceptance by extensionists and researchers can be overcome with study tours and farm visit to practicing farmers (World bank/ FREBRAPDP, Study tour, 1998)

Early Financial Returns

The most important lesson in natural resource management by rural communities, cited by several EPAGRI and other technicians, is that an initial emphasis on increased farm income generation through such technologies as ZT and animal waste utilization, incentivated through Clubes Amigos da Terra, farmer associations and other community groups ( preferably in a microcatchment context) can facilitate adoption of less profitable, bur more environmentally positive actions, such as reforestation, community water tanks for filling sprayers, sewage treatment and disposal of agrochemical containers. Zero Tillage is seen as the gateway to a new philosophy which engenders less financially alternative, but environmentally positive actions.

Financial Incentives

Essentially, the major part of the Zero Tillage area in Brazil has been implanted with the farmer’s own investment and direct government incentives have played little part. Amongst the few examples of government stimuli to ZT are (i) a one per cent point reduction (3.9 to 2.9% for corn and soya) in the federal PROAGRO crop insurance linked to rural credit (this volume is highly restricted and directed mainly towards small farmers, whose PROAGRO tariffs are differentiated under PRONAF, PROCERA, FCO and PAPRA low interest credit lines and not discounted for Zero Tillage practices) enacted in 1997, (ii) a R$3 million state credit scheme in São Paulo for ZT planters and sprayers restricted to small and medium farmers (4% interest rate and 4 years grace period) effective in 1998 and (iii) small grants under IBRD projects, exemplified by SC where farmers can receive a one-off grant of up to US$430/ha for collective machinery acquisition plus cover crop seeds for one hectare. These stimuli are an adjunct and not the raison d’être of adoption. There are no tax breaks specifically for Zero Tillage.

To obtain government support for natural resource conservation actions by the farmer, it is essential to make the general public, decision and opinion makers aware of the social benefits of the adoption of these practices. While some specific data has been generated on this, a wide-ranging environmental accounting system has not been yet implanted. The environmental awakening of the Brazilian public conscience- has been largely on the negative aspects of natural resource management by farmers. Society has found it convenient to blame farmers for ecological misdemeanours, disregarding the fact that society itself, as a consumer, is and has been, a beneficiary of cheap agricultural products, at the expense of diminishing the stock or quality of natural resources. FEBRAPDP, with the assistance of APDC, has attempted to forge links between environmentalists and farmers through publications showing the benefits of Zero Tillage to society (Saturnino & Landers, 1997, Landers at al.1994 – Rio + pamphlet and others), involvement in events and workshops (such as those discussing Agenda 21), newspapers and television interviews and on a person-to-person basis.

Key areas to educate public opinion are :

1. Zero Tillage is the only current macro-economic solution which can respond to the conflicting demands of more food at lower prices while ensuring sustainability – in fact land quality is continuously increasing under ZT (Sá, 1993)

2. ZT farmers have become environmentally re-orientated towards sustainability and pollution avoidance and this should be incentivated by all means possible;

3. ZT investments are largely borne by farmers, but benefits accrue to society as a whole;

4. organic food generally costs more (this is not a point – ZT is a meadle way to achieve organic food production. ZT does use all principles from organic ag. and may be the closest we can go from it, considering that ZT makes it possible to manage OM and crop rotation in a reasonable way, achieving sustainability)

5. more (Borlaug, 1994);

6. dessicant herbicides specific to ZT are neutral to the environment and in the least dangerous category for groundwater pollution (Hirschi et al. (1991) ; even though paraquat , with the highest toxicity rating, is quite toxic to man (although not as much as some insecticides), it becomes harmless in the soil; You’d better rewhite this and the next one! See note!)

7. modern post-emergent herbicides are practically harmless to man and used in application rates of often less than 100 gms/ha, but the generalisationgeneralization of classifying everything as an "agrotoxic" gives a very distorted view to the public and its decision- makers;

Legal Framework

In order to facilitate microcatchment and other actions must be in place..

POTENTIAL ACTIONS TO PROMOTE SUSTAINABLE INTENSIFICATION

Interministerial Cooperation

Watershed management interfaces different ministries with converging interests and the use of the micro-catchment as a planning unit for both Agriculture and Environment Ministries in Brazil could provide a platform for joint actions. The support of both the Environment Ministry’s Water Resources Secretariat and the Ministry of AgricultureAgriculture and Supply for Zero Tillage practices as a tool for watershed management and sustainable agriculture is at anan initial, but promising stage for collaboration. The very high impacts of this practice alone justify concentrating the firepower of natural resource management efforts at farm level solely on its adoption, with a second phase approach of complementary actions, such as reforestation, toxic waste removal, etc. with long payout periods However, animal waste application on crops has been successfully grafted early into microcatchment management projects in Santa Catarina, since it also generates immediate financial returns.

International (GEF) project to stimulate Zero Tillage worldwide

1. International level

• A top class documentary film showing the change in mentality of the farmer, the evolution of sustainable intensification technology, led by Zero Tillage, and its benefits for society;

• Study tours;

• International training courses and workshops in Brazil for new extension, NGO and research methodology;

• International scholarship scheme for above;

• In-country training courses and workshops strengthened with outside trainers;

• Strengthening and interlinking of existing networks through funding international consultancies, translations of selected technical documents, travel and support staff and other actions outlined above.

2. National level

• Consolidation workshops with technicians and farmers who have returned from study tours and overseas training with development of action plans for implementation of sustainable intensification of natural resources management ;

• Effective demand-led support for innovative farmers participating in on-farm R&D.

• Interministerial support for integrated watershed management projects ;

• Support for both NGO networks and state/federal organisations to promote adoption of demand-led R&D and technical assistance/extension and travel scholarships;

• Simultaneous translation for high-level technical events

• Training of economists in and funding for environmental accounting projects/components;

• In-depth studies to further develop NGO and extension methodology;

• Tax incentives to farmers adopting and private sector organisations which promote Zero Tillage;

• Specific credit lines and grants for sustainable intensification investment with social transfer credits reflecting financial gains derived by society from the farmers’ actions.

One-Off Carbon Sink Grants

Based on Rattan Lal’s calculations (Lal, 1997), but adjusting for a 1.1 average bulk density in Brazilian soils (Lal used 1.4 to 1.45 for low and high estimates and mean incremental SOC content of 0.001 % / yr as a realistic attainable goal). Assuming a cropped area of 40 million hectares, Brazil could achieve by 2020 an aggregate increase in SOC equal to 40% calculated for the USA plus the adjustment by 1.4/1.1 for bulk density, or 178 Tg plus the one-off sequestration represented by a carbon content of 45% in crop residues, estimated at an average 3 ton DM/ha, or 120 million x 0.45 = 90 million tons of carbon .

J. Kinsella put a value of US$ 30/acre (US$74/ha) on carbon sequestration in the USA indicated values of US$ 10/ha. (Verbal communication, Rural Week While B. Watson – ENV – IBRD rural Week 1999). As a one-off grant the first figure would be on the high side to accelerate ZT adoption in Brazil, where the technology is well-known, but it might not be enough in other countries where farmer resistance is high to such a change. The second figure would be of dubious effect anywhere.

Low Interest Investment Credit Lines

Credit lines of below 5% per annum over-inflation and 2-4 years grave period would be anan adequate incentive in most situations. This would not be a subsidy, since the difference between 5% and commercial lending rates would be considered as a social transfer to compensate the farmer for social benefits accruing from ZT adoption.

These grants would be directed as incentives for CATs and other farmer associations to make local adjustments to ZT technology, emphasizing new crops, increased fertilizer and lime/gypsum efficiency, variety equipment and herbicide testing and other areas of immediate impact on profitability. The grants would be seed money for farmer NGO’s – say a maximum of US$ 5 to 10.000 per year for 4 years (possibly with a limit per farmer participant or per hectare).

This would empower CATs or like entities to contract professional services to execute and document on-farm technology development and later disseminate it. The sub-contractor could be a private consultant agronomist, government extensionist or researcher. Examples of where grants could be applied as seed money:

• Embrapa now has an umbrella agreement mechanism with NGO’s to facilitate participation of researchers in this way, where the NGO pays for operating expenses and Embrapa the salary.

• CATs have captured private sector funds in partnerships for on farm R+D – seed money would especially facilitate this for small farmer groups.

Land Use Capability revision

These criteria need to be revised for Zero Tillage Management. This system reduces susceptibility to erosion (soil losses of less than 20% of conventional tillage) and promotes much higher rainfall infiltration, reducing runoff significantly when compared to the conventional disc cultivation.

Pasture Intensification Grants

There are at least 30 million hectares of degraded pasture in the Cerrado and Amazon areas.. Technology now exists for these and other similar regions to convert such areas first to productive cropland for soya, rainfed rice or corn production and progressively pasture in rotation with crops. This would absorb pressure for clearing by (i) absorbing higher stocking rates and (ii) accommodate the expansion of annual crops within existing cleared areas. New land clearing is induced to accommodate herd growth or compensate reductions in carrying capacity as existing pasture degrades the policy option of leaving degraded the pasture in the Amazon area to revert to forest might not be effective. In areas near the new rail and river transport links there were anyway be pressure to expense the agricultural frontier, which could result in more sacrifice of virgin forest if incentive penalties do not make the intensification alternative financially attractive (C.F, Mahar, 19). Restriction such an incentive solely to the Carrado area would be more ecologically acceptable and could, indirectly, take pressure off the Amazon area.

• A carrot and stick approach could be effective:
• Grants or investment loans for conversion of degraded pasture with crop land; and
• a ban on new clearing.

Internalization of the social cost of preserving the native vegetation justifies social transfers as incentives to this end.

APDC (1997). Articles on small farmers Zero Tillage in "Direto no Cerrado" No.5 and No.6, 1997 and No. 11, 1996. Associação de Plantio Direto n Cerrado, Goiânia, GO, Brazil.

BORGES, G de. O. Resumo Histórico do Plantio Direto no Brasil. In: Plantio Direto no Brasil, Ed. Embrapa-CNPT, FUNDACEP e Fundação ABC. Editora Aldeia Norte, Passo Fundo, RS, Brazil.

Borlaug, N.E. (1994).BORLAUG, N.E. Feeding a human population that increasingly crowds a fragile a fragile planet. Keynote Lecture at 15^th World Congress of Soil Science: Anais - International Society of Soil Science. 1994.

Bragagnolo, N., e Parchen, C.A. (1991).BRAGAGNOLO, N. & PARCHEN, CA. O Efeito da Conservação do Solo a Água em Microbacias Hidrográficas an Qualidade da Água Para Consumo qualidade da Água para Consumo Humano. Sec. Agricultura e Abastecimento do  Paraná. Xerox.

Xerox. Paraná,. 1991.

DE FREITAS, V. H.. Impactos Economicos, Sociais, Ambientais em Duas Microbacias de Santa Catarina: Ribeirão Das Pedras e Rio Macaco, 1997. EPAGRI, Florianópolis, Brazil.

EMBRAPA - CNPT, FECOTRIGO e Fundação ABC (1993). Plantio Direto no Brasil, Passo Fundo, Ed. Aldeia Norte.

FUNDAÇÃO ABC, Resumo Histórico, Castro, PR, 1998.

GENTIL, L.V., GONÇALVES, A.L.D., DA SILVA, K.B, (1993). Comparação Econômica e Agronômica entre o Plantio Direto e Plantio Convencional no Cerrado Brasileiro. Universidade de Brasília. Xerox

GOODLEND, IAPAR (1981) O Plantio Direto no Paraná.Circular No. 23, Londrina PR.

LAL, R. Residue Management, Conservation Tillage and Soil Restoration for Mitigating Greenhouse Effect By CO₂ Enrichment. Soil & Tillage Research, 43 (1997) 81-107 )

LANDERS, J. N., et al. Fascículo de experiências de Plantio Direto no Cerrado. Goiânia: APDC, 1995. 261p.

LANDERS, J. N., TEIXEIRA, S. M., MILHOMEN, A.. Possíveis impactos da técnica de Plantio Direto sobre a sustentabilidade da produção de grãos an região dos Cerrados. In: CONGRESSO BRASILEIRO DE ECONOMIA E SOCIOLOGIA, 32, 1994, Brasília. Desafio do Estado diante de uma agricultura em transformação. Anais...Brasília: SOBER, 1994. 2v. p.799-820.

LANDERS, J. N. O Plantio Direto na agricultura: o caso do Cerrado. In: Gestão Ambiental no Brasil: experiência e sucesso. Rio de Janeiro: Fundação Getúlio Vargas, 1996. 408p. p.03-33. LOPES, I. V., et al

LANDERS, J.N. Technology Transfer Mechanisms for the New Zero Tillage Techniques in the Savannahs of Central Brasil and Its Benefits for the Environment. In: ACTS OF THE WORKSHOP "GESTION AGROBIOLOGIQUE DES ÉCOSYSTÈMES AGRAIRES" FOFIFA-CIRAD Antatanarivo, Madagascar , 1998. in press.

NEIS, T. et alii. (1992) Segundo Encontro sobre Safrinha – Região de Jataí- GO. XEROX – Banco do Brasil, Jataí-GO.

PEIXOTO, T. dos G. & de Castro Filho, C. (1996). Anais do 1^o Congresso Brasileiro de PD, IAPAR, Ponta Grossa, PR.

SATURNINO, H. M., LANDERS, J. N.(Ed.). O meio ambiente e o Plantio Direto. Goiânia: APDC, 1997.

RIBEIRO, 1998

SEGUY, L., BOUZINAC, S. Gestão dos solos e das culturas ans áreas de fronteiras agrícolas dos cerrados úmidos e das Florestas do Centro-oeste brasileiro. Convênio RPA/COOPERLUCAS/CIRAD-CA, Projetos Cooperlucas/Cirad-CA, Lucas de Rio Verde-MT. 1994.

SEGUY, L., BOUZINAC, S., MATSUBARA, M., TREVISAN, E., GALVAGNI, E. Gestão dos solos e das culturas ans fronteiras agrícolas dos cerrados úmidos do Centro-oeste. Convênio RPA/CIRAD-CA Fazenda Progresso, Lucas de Rio Verde-MT. 1992

SEGUY, L., BOUZINAC, S., TRENTINI, A. Construção de uma agricultura sustentável, lucrativa e adaptada aos entraves pedoclimáticos das regiões tropicais úmidas. Informações Agronômicas, Potafos, Piracicaba. V.74, 1996. (Encarte, 20p.)

SEMINÁRIO INTERNACIONAL DO SISTEMA PLANTIO DIRETO, 1, 1995, Passo Fundo. Resumos. Passo Fundo: EMBRAPA-CNPT, 1995. 182p.

VASCONCELOS,H., LANDERS, J. N.. Agricultura sustentável nos Cerrados. In: Cultura de soja nos Cerrados, Arantes, N. E., Souza, P. I. de M.. Potafos, Piracicaba. 1993.

YORINORI, J.T. Cancro da haste da soja: epidemiologia e controle. Londrina: Embrapa-Soja, 1996. 75p. (Circular Técnica, 14) MT. 1992.