Evaluating Sustainability in Traditional Silvopastoral Systems (caívas): Looking Beyond the Impact of Animals on Biodiversity
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Caívas are traditional silvopastoral systems that occur in the Araucaria Forest biome, Southern Brazil, in which animal production and erva-mate extraction are integrated. Participatory research was conducted in caívas in the Northern Plateau, Santa Catarina State, to identify strategies to intensify pasture use and increase animal productivity. To better understand the outcomes of these strategies, a sustainability assessment was conducted in properties that participated in the research (improved caívas; IC) and those that did not (traditional caívas; TC). The Sustainability Assessment of Food and Agriculture Systems (SAFA) tool 2.0.0 for smallholders was chosen as it evaluates the productive unit as a whole using environmental, social, economic, and governance indicators and is tailored for small-scale production. All evaluated indicators showed higher scores for IC properties in relation to TC. In general, the SAFA analysis showed that when evaluated as productive systems, TCs are a strategic option for rural development, as 65% of their indicators were evaluated as good. With the support of rural outreach and research and the adoption of appropriate technologies, this percentage increased to 86% in ICs. These results confirm that with adequate support caívas can significantly contribute to the development of more sustainable livestock farming in Southern Brazil.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it