The objective of this study was to assess the impacts of biogas production implemented by family farmers organized in a cooperative agroenergy condominium. Evidences of changes in socioenvironmental performance were obtained through field observations and queries to the farmers. Observed ‘change coefficients’ were inserted into multicriteria indicators, weighted by their spatial scale of occurrence in the rural establishments, and impact indices were calculated for a set of seven characterization aspects (technological efficiency, environmental quality, productive process, employment, income, health, and management, and administration), integrated in 23 criteria and 123 indicators. The resulting impact indices of the implementation of the cooperative agroenergy condominium pointed out to positive performances in most of the criteria, with occasional transitory negative indices in specific indicators, related to farmers' particular contexts. Statistically significant positive results were obtained for seven of the ten Ecological impact criteria, as follows (i) use of agricultural inputs and resources; (ii) energy consumption; (iii) self-generation, utilization, reuse, and autonomy in the agricultural area; (iv) energy security; (v) emissions to the atmosphere; (vi) soil quality, and (vii) water quality. In the Socioenvironmental impacts dimension, statistically significant positive results were found for the following criteria: (i) productivity; (ii) productive integration in the concept of biorefinery/Ecopark; (iii) training; (iv) qualification and availability of work; (v) income generation; (vi) waste disposal, and (vii) institutional relationship. The agroenergy condominium contributed to reducing environmental impacts, promoting productive efficiency and improving income generation in the cooperating family farms.

本研究的目的是评估在农业能源合作公寓中组织的家庭农民实施的沼气生产的影响。通过实地观察和向农民询问，获得了社会环境绩效变化的证据。观察到的“变化系数”被插入到多标准指标中，根据它们在农村机构中发生的空间尺度进行加权，并针对一组七个特征方面（技术效率、环境质量、生产过程、就业、收入、健康）计算影响指数。 、管理、行政），纳入 23 项标准和 123 项指标。由此产生的实施合作农业能源公寓的影响指数表明在大多数标准中表现良好，与农民的具体情况有关的特定指标中偶尔会出现暂时的负面指数。十项生态影响标准中的七项在统计上取得了显着的积极结果，具体如下： (i) 农业投入物和资源的使用；(ii) 能源消耗；(iii) 农业领域的自产、利用、再利用和自治；(iv) 能源安全；(v) 排放到大气中；(vi) 土壤质量，以及 (vii) 水质。在社会环境影响维度中，发现以下标准具有统计学意义的积极结果：(i) 生产力；(ii) 生物精炼/生态园概念的生产整合；(iii) 培训；(iv) 工作资格和可用性；(v) 创收；(vi) 废物处理，以及 (vii) 机构关系。