ABSTRACT Conservation agriculture (CA) is recognized as a promising crop management strategy for sustainable agricultural intensification. The objective of this study was to evaluate CA cropping systems for rainfed maize as an alternative to the traditional tillage-based cropping systems (CT) in the context of family farms, using a multi-criteria model that represents the point of view of farmers. Farmers considered several aspects for evaluating the cropping systems, thatwere systematized in the model through five criteria (with sub-criteria): (a) costs; (b) yield; (c) labour; (d) human health and environment; and (e) production risks. CA did not differ from CT for the ‘costs’ criterion but was superior for the ‘yield’ and ‘labour’ criteria. In contrast, CT obtained better ratings for the criteria ‘human health and environment’ and ‘production risks’. Considering all criteria, CA was better appraised than CT. However, a new local policy measure that subsidizes the hiring of mechanized tillage services overturns this outcome, indicating the importance of exogenous factors. Overall, the participatory processes in building the model allowed us to better understand the reasons of adoption or non-adoption of CA by small-scale farmers in the tropics.

中文翻译：

---

在巴西塞拉多家庭农民的背景下对玉米种植系统进行参与式多标准评估

摘要 保护性农业 (CA) 被公认为可持续农业集约化的一种有前途的作物管理策略。本研究的目的是使用代表农民观点的多标准模型，在家庭农场的背景下评估雨养玉米的 CA 种植系统作为传统基于耕作的种植系统 (CT) 的替代方案。农民考虑了评估种植系统的几个方面，这些方面通过五个标准（带有子标准）在模型中系统化：(a) 成本；(b) 产量；(c) 劳工；(d) 人类健康和环境；(e) 生产风险。CA 在“成本”标准方面与 CT 没有区别，但在“产量”和“劳动力”标准方面优于 CT。相比之下，CT 在“人类健康和环境”和“生产风险”标准方面获得了更好的评级。考虑到所有标准，CA 比 CT 更好。然而，一项补贴雇用机械化耕作服务的新地方政策措施推翻了这一结果，表明外生因素的重要性。总体而言，构建模型的参与过程使我们能够更好地了解热带小农采用或不采用 CA 的原因。