Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America
- Autores
- Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde; Peri, Pablo Luis; Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro; Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz; Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel; Huertas Herrera, Alejandro; Sánchez Jardón, Laura; Lorenzo, Cristian; Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José
- Año de publicación
- 2018
- Idioma
- inglés
- Tipo de recurso
- artículo
- Estado
- versión aceptada
- Descripción
- In recent decades agroforestry has undergone significant development in Latin America. South America generates the most scientific research on the topic in the region. We conducted a comprehensive review and analysis of knowledge production for South American agroforestry that includes livestock grazing, known as agrosilvopastoralism (AS), examining how different sociopolitical factors such as sources of funding, institutional priorities, and international cooperation can bias the direction and objectives of scientific research. We assessed the major attributes of scientific publications on the topic (25 articles per country; overall n = 210) and the potential factors underlying the processes of research and development in the region. The tree component was the most studied, while the livestock component received less attention. Studies were mainly focused on the production of goods and services (monetary or nonmonetary approaches), except in Brazil, where conservation was the major study objective. Stakeholders were involved in more than half of the studies (60%), and they were mostly ranchers and local producers. More than half (70%) of the studies offered recommendations based on their results, and such recommendations were mostly concerned with the management of agrosilvopastoral system components. In general, studies were led just as often by local as foreign first authors and coauthored by more than three people as part of interinstitutional working groups. Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Chile had more frequent cooperation among institutions and countries but mainly used their own funding. In contrast, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru had almost 100% of their studies supported by foreign countries (North America and Europe). Countries with greater internal funding of research generated more long-term studies. Besides this, two clear trends were detected: 1) conservation and social aspects were mainly supported by sources from external countries led by foreign principal investigators, and 2) production issues were supported from sources within countries and supported high levels of cooperation among institutions.
EEA Santa Cruz
Fil: Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina
Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina
Fil: Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.
Fil: Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina
Fil: Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina
Fil: Huertas Herrera, Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina
Fil: Sánchez Jardón, Laura. Universidad Complutense de Madrir. Department of Ecology; España
Fil: Lorenzo, Cristian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego; Argentina
Fil: Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina - Fuente
- Rangeland ecology & management. (7 February 2018)
- Materia
-
Sistemas Agrosilvopascícolas
Agroforesteria
Sistemas de Conocimiento e Información
Agrosilvopastoral Systems
Agroforestry
Knowledge and Information Systems
América del Sur - Nivel de accesibilidad
- acceso restringido
- Condiciones de uso
- Repositorio
- Institución
- Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria
- OAI Identificador
- oai:localhost:20.500.12123/2552
Ver los metadatos del registro completo
id |
INTADig_4a338146ec00bb7e3801b142d140b940 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:localhost:20.500.12123/2552 |
network_acronym_str |
INTADig |
repository_id_str |
l |
network_name_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
spelling |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South AmericaSoler Esteban, Rosina MatildePeri, Pablo LuisBahamonde, Héctor AlejandroGargaglione, Veronica BeatrizOrmaechea, Sebastián GabrielHuertas Herrera, AlejandroSánchez Jardón, LauraLorenzo, CristianMartínez Pastur, Guillermo JoséSistemas AgrosilvopascícolasAgroforesteriaSistemas de Conocimiento e InformaciónAgrosilvopastoral SystemsAgroforestryKnowledge and Information SystemsAmérica del SurIn recent decades agroforestry has undergone significant development in Latin America. South America generates the most scientific research on the topic in the region. We conducted a comprehensive review and analysis of knowledge production for South American agroforestry that includes livestock grazing, known as agrosilvopastoralism (AS), examining how different sociopolitical factors such as sources of funding, institutional priorities, and international cooperation can bias the direction and objectives of scientific research. We assessed the major attributes of scientific publications on the topic (25 articles per country; overall n = 210) and the potential factors underlying the processes of research and development in the region. The tree component was the most studied, while the livestock component received less attention. Studies were mainly focused on the production of goods and services (monetary or nonmonetary approaches), except in Brazil, where conservation was the major study objective. Stakeholders were involved in more than half of the studies (60%), and they were mostly ranchers and local producers. More than half (70%) of the studies offered recommendations based on their results, and such recommendations were mostly concerned with the management of agrosilvopastoral system components. In general, studies were led just as often by local as foreign first authors and coauthored by more than three people as part of interinstitutional working groups. Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Chile had more frequent cooperation among institutions and countries but mainly used their own funding. In contrast, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru had almost 100% of their studies supported by foreign countries (North America and Europe). Countries with greater internal funding of research generated more long-term studies. Besides this, two clear trends were detected: 1) conservation and social aspects were mainly supported by sources from external countries led by foreign principal investigators, and 2) production issues were supported from sources within countries and supported high levels of cooperation among institutions.EEA Santa CruzFil: Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; ArgentinaFil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; ArgentinaFil: Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina.Fil: Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; ArgentinaFil: Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; ArgentinaFil: Huertas Herrera, Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; ArgentinaFil: Sánchez Jardón, Laura. Universidad Complutense de Madrir. Department of Ecology; EspañaFil: Lorenzo, Cristian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego; ArgentinaFil: Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina2018-06-05T14:26:55Z2018-06-05T14:26:55Z2018-02info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersionhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501info:ar-repo/semantics/articuloapplication/pdfhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155074241730180Xhttp://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/25521550-74241551-5028https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2017.12.006Rangeland ecology & management. (7 February 2018)reponame:INTA Digital (INTA)instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariaenginfo:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess2025-09-29T13:44:20Zoai:localhost:20.500.12123/2552instacron:INTAInstitucionalhttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/Organismo científico-tecnológicoNo correspondehttp://repositorio.inta.gob.ar/oai/requesttripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.arArgentinaNo correspondeNo correspondeNo correspondeopendoar:l2025-09-29 13:44:20.467INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuariafalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
title |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
spellingShingle |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde Sistemas Agrosilvopascícolas Agroforesteria Sistemas de Conocimiento e Información Agrosilvopastoral Systems Agroforestry Knowledge and Information Systems América del Sur |
title_short |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
title_full |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
title_fullStr |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
title_full_unstemmed |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
title_sort |
Assessing Knowledge Production for Agrosilvopastoral Systems in South America |
dc.creator.none.fl_str_mv |
Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde Peri, Pablo Luis Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel Huertas Herrera, Alejandro Sánchez Jardón, Laura Lorenzo, Cristian Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José |
author |
Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde |
author_facet |
Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde Peri, Pablo Luis Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel Huertas Herrera, Alejandro Sánchez Jardón, Laura Lorenzo, Cristian Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Peri, Pablo Luis Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel Huertas Herrera, Alejandro Sánchez Jardón, Laura Lorenzo, Cristian Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José |
author2_role |
author author author author author author author author |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
Sistemas Agrosilvopascícolas Agroforesteria Sistemas de Conocimiento e Información Agrosilvopastoral Systems Agroforestry Knowledge and Information Systems América del Sur |
topic |
Sistemas Agrosilvopascícolas Agroforesteria Sistemas de Conocimiento e Información Agrosilvopastoral Systems Agroforestry Knowledge and Information Systems América del Sur |
dc.description.none.fl_txt_mv |
In recent decades agroforestry has undergone significant development in Latin America. South America generates the most scientific research on the topic in the region. We conducted a comprehensive review and analysis of knowledge production for South American agroforestry that includes livestock grazing, known as agrosilvopastoralism (AS), examining how different sociopolitical factors such as sources of funding, institutional priorities, and international cooperation can bias the direction and objectives of scientific research. We assessed the major attributes of scientific publications on the topic (25 articles per country; overall n = 210) and the potential factors underlying the processes of research and development in the region. The tree component was the most studied, while the livestock component received less attention. Studies were mainly focused on the production of goods and services (monetary or nonmonetary approaches), except in Brazil, where conservation was the major study objective. Stakeholders were involved in more than half of the studies (60%), and they were mostly ranchers and local producers. More than half (70%) of the studies offered recommendations based on their results, and such recommendations were mostly concerned with the management of agrosilvopastoral system components. In general, studies were led just as often by local as foreign first authors and coauthored by more than three people as part of interinstitutional working groups. Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Chile had more frequent cooperation among institutions and countries but mainly used their own funding. In contrast, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru had almost 100% of their studies supported by foreign countries (North America and Europe). Countries with greater internal funding of research generated more long-term studies. Besides this, two clear trends were detected: 1) conservation and social aspects were mainly supported by sources from external countries led by foreign principal investigators, and 2) production issues were supported from sources within countries and supported high levels of cooperation among institutions. EEA Santa Cruz Fil: Soler Esteban, Rosina Matilde. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina Fil: Peri, Pablo Luis. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina Fil: Bahamonde, Héctor Alejandro. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina. Fil: Gargaglione, Veronica Beatriz. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de la Patagonia Austral; Argentina Fil: Ormaechea, Sebastián Gabriel. Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria (INTA). Estación Experimental Agropecuaria Santa Cruz; Argentina Fil: Huertas Herrera, Alejandro. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina Fil: Sánchez Jardón, Laura. Universidad Complutense de Madrir. Department of Ecology; España Fil: Lorenzo, Cristian. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Tierra del Fuego; Argentina Fil: Martínez Pastur, Guillermo José. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas; Argentina. Centro Austral de Investigaciones Cientificas; Argentina |
description |
In recent decades agroforestry has undergone significant development in Latin America. South America generates the most scientific research on the topic in the region. We conducted a comprehensive review and analysis of knowledge production for South American agroforestry that includes livestock grazing, known as agrosilvopastoralism (AS), examining how different sociopolitical factors such as sources of funding, institutional priorities, and international cooperation can bias the direction and objectives of scientific research. We assessed the major attributes of scientific publications on the topic (25 articles per country; overall n = 210) and the potential factors underlying the processes of research and development in the region. The tree component was the most studied, while the livestock component received less attention. Studies were mainly focused on the production of goods and services (monetary or nonmonetary approaches), except in Brazil, where conservation was the major study objective. Stakeholders were involved in more than half of the studies (60%), and they were mostly ranchers and local producers. More than half (70%) of the studies offered recommendations based on their results, and such recommendations were mostly concerned with the management of agrosilvopastoral system components. In general, studies were led just as often by local as foreign first authors and coauthored by more than three people as part of interinstitutional working groups. Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Chile had more frequent cooperation among institutions and countries but mainly used their own funding. In contrast, Bolivia, Ecuador, and Peru had almost 100% of their studies supported by foreign countries (North America and Europe). Countries with greater internal funding of research generated more long-term studies. Besides this, two clear trends were detected: 1) conservation and social aspects were mainly supported by sources from external countries led by foreign principal investigators, and 2) production issues were supported from sources within countries and supported high levels of cooperation among institutions. |
publishDate |
2018 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2018-06-05T14:26:55Z 2018-06-05T14:26:55Z 2018-02 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/acceptedVersion http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501 info:ar-repo/semantics/articulo |
format |
article |
status_str |
acceptedVersion |
dc.identifier.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155074241730180X http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/2552 1550-7424 1551-5028 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2017.12.006 |
url |
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S155074241730180X http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.12123/2552 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rama.2017.12.006 |
identifier_str_mv |
1550-7424 1551-5028 |
dc.language.none.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.rights.none.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
restrictedAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Rangeland ecology & management. (7 February 2018) reponame:INTA Digital (INTA) instname:Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
reponame_str |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
collection |
INTA Digital (INTA) |
instname_str |
Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
INTA Digital (INTA) - Instituto Nacional de Tecnología Agropecuaria |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
tripaldi.nicolas@inta.gob.ar |
_version_ |
1844619122884739072 |
score |
12.559606 |