The intensification of crop production is widely recognized to negatively affect the agrobiodiversity in smallholder systems. This trend can also be observed in Quinoa production systems, where few varieties are commercialized while maintaining traditional varieties of quinoa remains a key agricultural activity in the high-Andes landscape. In recent decades, the “boom” of quinoa production has given rise to national projects intended to ensure that farmers benefit from their agricultural heritage, including the development of a collective trademark. However, little is known about the opinions of smallholder farmers regarding quinoa varieties cultivation, farming practices, market choices, or the development of a collective trademark as a tool to safeguard a position in the booming international quinoa market. To address these questions, we developed our research in three villages in the Puno region of Peru, quinoa’s center of origin. We applied a novel combination of participatory methods: the Q methodology to interpret the perceptions of smallholder quinoa farmers concerning the activities that are important on their farms, and the Four-Square Analysis workshops to explore quinoa biodiversity management. The results of our Q-analysis revealed three types of opinions emerging among farmers: (Type 1) Conservationist, (Type 2) Intensification sustainer, and (Type 3) Collaboration seeker. Type 1 assigns importance to maintaining and promoting quinoa biodiversity through collective practices and markets. Type 2 focuses on developing export-oriented production based on certified and improved varieties, combined with efficient ways of storing quinoa. Type 3 appears to value the collective aspects of organizations and cooperation among stakeholders. According to the results of the Four-Square Analysis, most landraces of quinoa are threatened by genetic erosion, as they are cultivated in situ in small plots and on few farms. Our results are an important baseline for further project development for biodiversity conservation in situ and market inclusion engaging local communities.

人们普遍认为，作物生产的集约化会对小农系统的农业生物多样性产生负面影响。这种趋势也可以在藜麦生产系统中观察到，其中很少有品种被商业化，同时保持传统藜麦品种仍然是安第斯山脉高地景观中的一项关键农业活动。近几十年来，藜麦生产的“繁荣”催生了旨在确保农民从其农业遗产中受益的国家项目，包括集体商标的开发。然而，对于小农户对藜麦品种种植、耕作方式、市场选择或集体商标的开发作为在蓬勃发展的国际藜麦市场中保持地位的工具的看法，知之甚少。为了解决这些问题，我们在藜麦的原产地秘鲁普诺地区的三个村庄开展了研究。我们采用了一种新颖的参与式方法组合：Q方法解释小规模藜麦农民对其农场重要活动的看法，以及探索藜麦生物多样性管理的四方分析研讨会。我们的Q分析结果揭示了农民中出现的三种观点：（第 1 类）保护主义者，（第 2 类）集约化支持者，和（第 3 类）合作寻求者. 第 1 类重视通过集体实践和市场来维护和促进藜麦生物多样性。类型 2 侧重于发展基于认证和改良品种的出口导向型生产，并结合有效的藜麦储存方式。第 3 类似乎重视组织的集体方面和利益相关者之间的合作。根据四方分析的结果，大多数藜麦地方品种都受到遗传侵蚀的威胁，因为它们是在小块土地和少数农场就地种植的。我们的结果是进一步开发生物多样性原地保护项目和吸引当地社区参与的市场包容性的重要基线。