Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Effects of a participatory bird census project on knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of coffee farmers in Colombia

  • Published:
Environment, Development and Sustainability Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This study presents an evaluation of a participatory bird census (PBC) project that has been administered to coffee farmers in Colombia. Our objectives were (1) to evaluate the effect of the PBC project on conservation knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of coffee farmers and (2) to learn about the barriers farmers perceive toward adopting conservation practices. We conducted 261 interviews on four groups to control for the effects of involvement with an environmental coffee certification program (Rainforest Alliance—RA) and the PBC project. The four groups were (1) non-PBC participant, non-RA certified; (2) PBC participant, non-RA certified; (3) non-PBC participant, RA certified; and (4) PBC participant, RA certified. PBC participant/RA and PBC participant/non-RA were more knowledgeable about migratory and threatened birds. PBC participant/RA, PBC participant/non-RA, and non-PBC participant/RA groups believed they had the skills to perform bird conservation practices on their farms. A majority of respondents indicated that they were performing bird conservation practices and had positive attitudes toward birds. Farmers believed that lack of environmental awareness and lack of knowledge were the main barriers to perform bird conservation practices. Evaluating participatory programs with Colombian farmers can reveal environmental literacy improvements, but self-reported surveys may not be adequate to ascertain attitude changes and adoption of conservation practices. Direct observations on individual farms would be required to determine the impacts on such outreach efforts. Bird conservation seems popular with Colombian coffee farmers, and outreach programs that give detailed biodiversity management information could help aid bird conservation efforts on coffee farms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

PBC:

Participatory bird census project

NP-NRA:

Non-PBC participant, non-Rainforest Alliance certified

P-NRA:

PBC participant, non-Rainforest Alliance certified

NP-RA:

Non-PBC participant, Rainforest Alliance certified

P-RA:

PBC participant, Rainforest Alliance certified

References

  • Ahnström, J., Höckert, J., Bergeå, H. L., Francis, C. A., Skelton, P., & Hallgren, L. (2008). Farmers and nature conservation: What is known about attitudes, context factors and actions affecting conservation? Renewable Agriculture and Food Systems, 24(1), 38–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Albertin, A., & Nair, P. K. R. (2004). Farmers’ perspectives on the role of shade trees in coffee production systems: An assessment from the Nicoya Peninsula, Costa Rica. Human Ecology, 32(4), 443–463.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, S. E. (2000). Resident attitudes towards conservation and Black Howler Monkeys in Belize: The Community Baboon Sanctuary. Environmental Conservation, 27(4), 341–350.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alston, D. G., & Reding, M. E. (1998). Factors influencing adoption and educational outreach of integrated pest management. Journal of Extension 36(3). http://www.joe.org/joe/1998june/a3.html. Accessed 5 February 2010.

  • Arbeláez, D., Lentijo, G. M., & Botero, J. E. (2007). Las aves en las zonas cafeteras. Biocarta, 11, 1–4. Chinchiná, Colombia: Cenicafé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Avery, M. I., Cummings, J. L., Decker, D. G., Johnson, J. W., Wise, J. C., & Howard, J. I. (1993). Field and aviary evaluation of low-level application rates of methiocarb for reducing bird damage to blueberries. Crop Protection, 12(2), 95–100.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Bawa, K. S. (2006). Globally dispersed local challenges in conservation biology. Conservation Biology, 20, 696–699.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brossard, D., Lewenstein, B., & Bonney, R. (2005). Scientific knowledge and attitude change: The impact of a citizen science project. International Journal of Science Education, 27, 1099–1121.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calheiros, D. F., Seidl, A. F., & Ferreira, C. J. A. (2000). Participatory research methods in environmental science: Local and scientific knowledge of a limnological phenomenon in the Pantanal wetland of Brazil. Journal of Applied Ecology, 37, 684–696.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, L. M., & Vainio-Mattila, A. (2003). Participatory development and community-based conservation: Opportunities missed for lessons learned? Human Ecology, 31(3), 417–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castaño, G. E. (2002). Estudio sociocultural de los caficultores y su relación con el manejo integrado de la broca del café. Revista Cenicafé, 53(1), 34–38.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chess, C. (2000). Evaluating environmental public participation: Methodological questions. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 43(6), 769–784.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cummings, J. L., Shwiff, S. A., & Tupper, S. K. (2005). Economic impacts of blackbird damage to the rice industry. Wildlife Damage Management Conference, 11, 317–322.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, G. C., Erlich, P. R., & Sánchez-Azofeifa, A. (2001). Countryside biogeography: Use of human-dominated habitats by the avifauna of southern Costa Rica. Ecological Applications, 11, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Young, R., Duncan, A., Frank, J., Gill, N., Rothman, S., Shenot, J., et al. (1993). Promoting source reduction behavior: The role of motivational information. Environment and Behavior, 25(1), 70–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duvel, G. H. (2007). Monitoring in extension: From principles to practical implementation. South African Journal of Agricultural Extension, 36, 78–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engels, C. A., & Jacobson, S. K. (2007). Evaluating long-term effects of the Golden Lion Tamarin environmental education program in Brazil. The Journal of Environmental Education, 38(3), 3–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ericson, J. A. (2006). A participatory approach to conservation in the Calakmul Biosphere Reserve, Campeche, Mexico. Landscape Urban Planning, 74, 242–266.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Espinosa, R., López, A. M. & Botero, J. E. (2009). En peligro de extinción. Biocarta, 14, 1–4. Chinchiná, Colombia: Cenicafé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrada, A., & Coates-Estrada, R. (2005). Diversity of Neotropical migratory landbird species assemblages in forest fragments and man-made vegetation in Los Tuxtlas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation, 14, 1719–1734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Estrada, A., Coates-Estrada, R., & Meritt, D. A, Jr. (1997). Anthropogenic landscape changes and avian diversity at Los Tuxtlas, Mexico. Biodiversity and Conservation, 6, 19–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans, S. M., Gebbels, S., & Stockill, J. M. (2008). Our shared responsibility: Participation in ecological projects as a means of empowering communities to contribute to coastal management processes. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 57, 3–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Ferraro, P. J., & Pattanayak, S. K. (2006). Money for nothing? A call for empirical evaluation of biodiversity conservation investments. Public Library of Science Biology, 4, 482–488.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Fiallo, E. A., & Jacobson, S. K. (1995). Local communities and protected areas: Attitudes of rural residents towards conservation and Machalilla National Park. Ecuador. Environmental Conservation, 22(3), 241–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • FNC (Federación Nacional de Cafeteros de Colombia). (2010). La tierra del café. http://www.cafedecolombia.com/particulares/es/la_tierra_del_cafe/. Accessed 5 February 2010.

  • Gillingham, S., & Lee, P. C. (1999). The impact of wildlife-related benefits on the conservation attitudes of local people around the Selous Game Reserve, Tanzania. Environmental Conservation, 26(3), 218–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gubbi, S., Linkie, M., & Leader-Williams, N. (2009). Evaluating the legacy of an integrated conservation and development project around a tiger reserve in India. Environmental Conservation, 35(4), 331–339.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guhl, A. (2009). Café, bosques y certificación agrícola en Aratoca, Santander. Revista de Estudios Sociales, 32, 114–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herzon, I., & Mikk, M. (2007). Farmers’ perceptions of biodiversity and their willingness to enhance it through agri-environment schemes: A comparative study from Estonia and Finland. Journal for Nature Conservation, 15, 10–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. B., Daily, G. C., & Ehrlich, P. R. (2002). Conservation of tropical forest birds in countryside habitats. Ecology Letters, 5(1), 121–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hungerford, H. R., & Volk, T. L. (1990). Changing learner behavior through environmental education. Journal of Environmental Education, 21(3), 8–22.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, S. K., McDuff, M. D., & Monroe, M. C. (2006). Conservation education and outreach techniques. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Jacobson, S. K., Sieving, K. E., Jones, G. A., & Van Doorn, A. (2003). Assessment of farmer attitudes and behavioral intentions toward bird conservation on organic and conventional Florida farms. Conservation Biology, 17(2), 595–606.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, B. B. (2002). Knowledge, action and pro-environmental behaviour. Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 325–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kainer, K., DiGiano, M. L., Duchelle, A. E., Wadt, L. H. O., & Dain, J. L. (2009). Partnering for greater success: Local stakeholders and research in tropical biology and conservation. Biotropica, 41(5), 555–562.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katzev, R. D., & Johnson, T. R. (1987). Promoting energy conservation: An analysis of behavioral research. Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kideghesho, J. R., Røskaft, E., & Kaltenborn, B. P. (2007). Factors influencing conservation attitudes of local people in Western Serengeti, Tanzania. Biodiversity Conservation, 16, 2213–2230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kollmus, A., & Agyeman, J. (2002). Mind the gap: Why do people act environmentally and what are the barriers to pro-environmental behavior? Environmental Education Research, 8(3), 239–260.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kruse, C. K., & Card, J. A. (2004). Effects of a conservation education camp program on campers’ self-reported knowledge, attitude and behavior. Journal of Environmental Education, 35(4), 33–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laubhan, M. K., & Gammonley, J. H. (2001). Agricultural producers’ perceptions of Sandhill Cranes in the San Luis Valley of Colorado. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 29(2), 639–645.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, H. F., & Zhang, D. D. (2008). Perceiving the environment from the lay perspective in desertified areas, northern China. Environmental Management, 41, 168–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lentijo, G. M., Arbeláez, D., Castellanos, O., Franco, N. G., López, A. M., & Botero, J. E. (2008). Enfoques participativos en investigación como una herramienta de conservación de las aves en zonas cafeteras de Colombia. Ornitología Neotropical, 19(Suppl.), 567–574.

    Google Scholar 

  • Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140.

  • López del Toro, P., Andresen, E., Barraza, L., & Estrada, A. (2009). Attitudes and knowledge of shade-coffee farmers towards vertebrates and their ecological functions. Tropical Conservation Science, 2(3), 299–318.

    Google Scholar 

  • Margoluis, R., Russell, V., González, M., Rojas, O., Magdaleno, J., Madrid, G., et al. (2001). Maximum yield? Sustainable agriculture as a tool for conservation. Washington, DC: Biodiversity Support Program.

    Google Scholar 

  • McIvor, D. E., & Conover, M. R. (1994). Perceptions of farmers and non-farmers toward management of problem wildlife. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 22, 212–219.

    Google Scholar 

  • McKenzie-Mohr, D., & Smith, W. (1999). Fostering sustainable behavior. British Columbia, CA: New Society Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, J. N., & Heinen, J. T. (2001). Does community-based conservation shape favorable attitudes among locals? An empirical study from Nepal. Environmental Management, 28(2), 165–177.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Mercer, D. E. (2004). Adoption of agroforestry innovations in the tropics: A review. Agroforestry Systems, 61–62, 311–328.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Monroe, M. (2003). Two avenues for encouraging conservation behaviors. Human Ecology Review, 10(2), 113–125.

    Google Scholar 

  • Msuya, C. P., & Duvel, G. H. (2007). The role of independent and intervening variables in maize growers’ adoption of seed spacing in the Njombe district of Tanzania. South African Journal of Agricultural Extension, 36, 109–123.

    Google Scholar 

  • Muriel, S. B., & Kattan, G. H. (2009). Effects of patch size and type of coffee matrix on Ithomiine butterfly diversity and dispersal in cloud-forest fragments. Conservation Biology, 23(4), 948–956.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Napier, T. L. (1998). Conservation coalitions cannot overcome poor conservation programming. Journal of Soil and Water Conservation, 53(4), 300–303.

    Google Scholar 

  • Potts, J., van der Meer, J., & Daitchman, J. (2010). The State of sustainability initiatives review 2010: Sustainability and transparency. http://www.iisd.org/publications/pub.aspx?pno=1363 Accessed 13 April 2012.

  • Rainforest Alliance. (2010). Sustainable agriculture, coffee. Available from: http://www.rainforest-alliance.org/agriculture.cfm?id=coffee. Accessed 6 February 2010.

  • Reed, M. S. (2008). Stakeholder participation for environmental management: A literature review. Biological Conservation, 141, 2417–2431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenberg, S., & Margerum, R. D. (2008). Landowner motivations for watershed restoration: Lessons from five watersheds. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 51(4), 477–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach (7th ed.). California: Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Salazar, H. M., Duque, H., Lentijo, G. M., & Botero, J. E. (2007). Descripción del uso actual de la biodiversidad por parte de los caficultores. In P. S. Baker & H. Duque (Eds.), Guía para la caficultura sostenible en Colombia: Un trabajo articulado con los caficultores, extensionistas y la comunidad (pp. 160–181). Chinchiná, Colombia: Cenicafé.

    Google Scholar 

  • Selebatso, M., Moe, S. R., & Swenson, J. E. (2008). Do farmers support Cheetah Acynonyx jubatus conservation in Botswana despite livestock depredation? Oryx, 42(3), 430–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Selener, D. (2005). Definitions, assumptions, characteristics and types of participatory research. In: J. Gonsalves, T. Becker, A. Braun, D. Campilan, H. De Chavez, E. Fajber, M. Kapiriri, J. Rivaca-Caminade & R. Vernooy (Eds.), Participatory research and development for sustainable agriculture and natural resource management: A sourcebook. Volume 1: Understanding participatory research and development (pp. 5–15). Ottawa, Canada: International Potato Center and International Development Research Centre.

  • Sheil, D., & Lawrence, A. (2004). Tropical biologists, local people and conservation: New opportunities for collaboration. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 19, 634–638.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shi, T., & Gill, R. (2005). Developing effective policies for the sustainable development of ecological agriculture in China: The case study of Jinshan County with a systems dynamics model. Ecological Economics, 53(2), 223–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith-Sebasto, N. J., & Semrau, H. J. (2004). Evaluation of the Environmental Education Program at the New Jersey School of Conservation. The Journal of Environmental Education, 36(1), 3–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stern, M. J., Powell, R. B., & Ardoin, N. M. (2008). Assessing outcomes from participation in a residential environmental education program. The Journal of Environmental Education, 39(4), 31–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sustainable Agriculture Network. (2010). Sustainable agriculture standard, July 2010, version 2. http://sanstandards.org/sitio/subsections/display/9 Accessed 11 April 2012.

  • Vanclay, F. (2004). Social principles for agricultural extension to assist in the promotion of natural resource management. Australian Journal of Experimental Agriculture, 44, 213–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vermeulen, S., & Sheil, D. (2006). Partnerships for tropical conservation. Oryx, 41, 434–440.

    Google Scholar 

  • Winters, P., Crissman, C. C., & Espinosa, P. (2004). Inducing the adoption of conservation technologies: Lessons from the Ecuadorian Andes. Environment and Development Economics, 9, 695–719.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zint, M., Kraemer, A., Northway, H., & Lim, M. (2002). Evaluation of the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Conservation Education Programs. Conservation Biology, 16(3), 641–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by the US Forest Service and the Nature Conservancy, through the participatory bird census project, and the Dexter Fellowship at University of Florida. We are grateful for the collaboration of Colombian coffee farmers and Comités de Cafeteros for their logistic support in Colombia. We thank Jorge Botero, PBC project’s team for their assistance on contacting farmers, and Viviana Gomez for interviewing assistance. We thank Susan K. Jacobson, Karen Kainer, and two anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments on the manuscript.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Gloria M. Lentijo

    Present address: National Coffee Research Centre, Cenicafé, A.A. 2427, Manizales, Colombia

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, 215 Newins-Ziegler Hall, Gainesville, FL, 32611, USA

    Gloria M. Lentijo & Mark E. Hostetler

Authors
  1. Gloria M. Lentijo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark E. Hostetler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gloria M. Lentijo.

Appendix

Appendix

1.1 Survey questions used in this study

1.1.1 Questions about knowledge

1. Can you do a list of the birds that you have observed in your farms? You just have to tell me the ones that you know with the names that you know.

2. Do you know what migratory birds are? I am going to read 3 definitions and you have to tell me which one is correct:

  1. a)

    Migratory birds are birds that make a trip from North America to tropical countries like Colombia, where they come to produce offspring, between September and March.

  2. b)

    Come to coffee-growing regions from other regions of Colombia looking for food.

  3. c)

    Travel from North America to tropical countries like Colombia where they come to feed, between September and March, and then return to North America to breed.

3. Do you know of any threatened bird species in your region?

YES □ NO □ If yes, Which? ____________________________________________________

4. Some birds are diminishing in the coffee-growing regions of Colombia. What do you think are the most important threats for birds in your region?

1.1.2 Questions about attitudes toward birds, bird conservation practices and perceived capability

Statements from 5 to 14 could be answered with a Likert-type scale as following: 1) strongly agree, 2) somewhat agree, 3) not sure/don’t know, 4) somewhat disagree, and 5) strongly disagree. Question 14 is the perceived capability question concerning bird conservation practices. Questions 15–19 are multiple choice.

5. Birds provide benefits to my farm

6. Teaching kids about birds is as important as to teach them math

7. It is very expensive to perform farm practices to conserve birds

8. I would like to go to workshops related on how to perform practices to conserve birds in my farm

9. Bird conservation is incompatible with running a coffee business

10. My farm provides a good shelter for birds

11. I can play an important role for bird conservation in my region

12. I would spend more money on new practices that might benefit birds

13. Currently, conserving birds does not offer any benefit for my coffee business

14. I lack the skills needed to implement farm practices that can help bird conservation

15. Would you support the creation of natural reserves in your region to conserve birds?

YES □ NO □ If yes, how would you support?

  1. a)

    Donating money to non-profit organizations that support creation of reserves

  2. b)

    Ceding part of your land for conservation

  3. c)

    With labor, for example doing reforestation in new reserves

16. Considering how are things in coffee-growing regions of Colombia, do you think that the number of bird species in your region is going to:

  1. a)

    Increase or stay stable

  2. b)

    Decrease

17. How willing would you be to donate 1 % of your coffee sales to create a fund for bird conservation in coffee-growing regions?

  1. a)

    Willing

  2. b)

    Not willing

18. If you implement practices to conserve birds in your farm, would you expect a monetary compensation when you sell your coffee?

YES □ NO □

18.b. If yes, how much do you think would be a fair compensation?

19. How much are you willing to invest to implement farm practices to conserve the environment?

  1. a)

    One to five days of labor a month

  2. b)

    More than five days a month

  3. c)

    Currently I am not willing to invest

1.1.3 Questions about conservation behaviors

20. Which of the following practices are you currently doing on your farm? I am going to read a list and you should tell me yes or no.

20a. Preserving forest fragments and natural vegetation present in the farm

20b. Preserving natural vegetation along streams

20c. Growing trees that produce food for birds

20d. Forbid hunting

20e. Restricting use of agrochemical products

21. What is the size (in hectares) of the conservation area do you have on your farm?

If you don’t have a conservation area on your farm, are you willing to stop producing for 5 years in an area of your farm to leave it as a conservation area?

YES □ NO □

1.1.4 Questions about barriers

22. What do you think are the most important reasons why you or other farmers are not implementing bird conservation practices?

23. Considering the reasons that you just commented, can you think about any idea about how farmers can get involved and do these practices

1.2 Survey questions used in this study. Spanish version

1.2.1 Preguntas acerca de conocimiento

1. Voy a pedirle que me haga una lista de las aves que usted ha observado en su finca, y yo voy a anotarlas. Sólo tiene que decirme los nombres con las que usted las conoce.

2. Sabe usted ¿que son las aves migratorias? Voy a leerle 3 definiciones y usted debe decirme cuál es la correcta:

  • □ Son aves que realizan un viaje desde Norteamérica hacia países como Colombia, donde llegan a reproducirse, durante los meses de septiembre a marzo

  • □ Vienen a las zonas cafeteras desde otras regiones de Colombia buscando alimento

  • □ Viajan desde Norteamérica hacia países como Colombia donde vienen a alimentarse durante los meses de septiembre a marzo, y luego regresan a Norteamérica a reproducirse

3. ¿Conoce usted alguna especie de ave amenazada de extinción en su región?

SI □ NO □ ¿Cuáles? ____________________________________________________

3. Los estudios muestran que algunas aves se estan acabando en las regiones cafeteras de Colombia.

4. ¿Cuáles cree usted que son las principales causas por las que las aves se están acabando?

Si usted no sabe o no está seguro por favor dígamelo, no hay ningún problema.

1.2.2 Preguntas acerca de las actitudes hacia las aves, prácticas de conservación y habilidades que perciben los caficultores para realizar prácticas de conservación

Las preguntas de la 5 a la 14 se responden con una escala tipo Likert, así: 1) totalmente de acuerdo, 2) de acuerdo, 3) no estoy seguro, 4) en desacuerdo, y 5) totalmente en desacuerdo.

La pregunta 14 es acerca de las habilidades que perciben los caficultores para realizar prácticas de conservación. Las preguntas de la 15 a la 19 son de selección múltiple.

5. Las aves proveen beneficios para mi finca

6. Enseñarle a los niños como conservar las aves es tan importante como enseñarles matemáticas

7. Es muy costoso implementar prácticas para conservar las aves

8. Me gustaría asistir a más capacitaciones sobre cómo realizar prácticas para conservar las aves

9. Es muy difícil tener una finca cafetera y conservar las aves

10. Mi finca provee un buen refugio para las aves en las zonas cafeteras

11. Yo puedo jugar un papel muy importante en la conservación de las aves de mi región

12. Yo gastaría más dinero en nuevas prácticas que pudieran beneficiar a las aves

13. Actualmente, conservar las aves no me ofrece ventajas para mi negocio cafetero

14. Yo no tengo las habilidades suficientes para realizar prácticas en mi finca que ayuden a conservar las aves.

15. ¿Apoyaría usted la creación de una nueva reserva natural en su región para conservar las aves?

SI □ NO □ Si la respuesta es afirmativa, ¿cómo sería su apoyo?

  • □ Donando dinero a organizaciones que apoyan la creación de reservas

  • □ Cediendo parte del terreno de su finca para conservación

  • □ Con trabajo, por ejemplo haciendo reforestaciones en las nuevas reservas

16. Considerando la forma actual en la que se cultiva el café en Colombia, usted cree que el numero de especies de aves en su región va a:

  • □ Aumentar o seguir estable

  • □ Disminuir

17. ¿Qué tan dispuesto estaría usted a donar un 1 % de sus ventas de café para crear un fondo para la conservación de las aves en las zonas cafeteras?

  • □ Algo dispuesto

  • □ En este momento no estoy dispuesto

18. Si usted realiza practicas para conservar las aves en su finca, ¿esperaría un sobreprecio al momento de vender su café?

SI □ NO □

18.b. Si la respuesta es afirmativa, cuánto sería una compensación justa por carga?

19. ¿Cuánto estaría dispuesto a invertir para implementar practicas de conservación del medio ambiente?

  • □ Uno a cinco jornales por mes

  • □ Más de cinco jornales por mes

  • □ Actualmente no invertiría nada

1.2.3 Preguntas acerca de comportamientos de conservación

20. Ahora voy a leerle una lista de algunas practicas que pueden ayudar a las aves. Podría decirme ¿Cuáles de estas prácticas usted realiza actualmente en su finca? Dígame si o no.

20a. Conservar los fragmentos de bosque y rastrojos que hay en la finca

20b. Conservar la vegetación natural a lado y lado de las quebradas

20c. Sembrar árboles que brinden alimento para las aves

20d. Prohibir la cacería

20e. Disminuir el uso de agroquímicos

21. ¿Tiene usted algún área en su finca que no este cultivada, tenga vegetación natural y destinada a la conservación del medio ambiente?

SI □ NO □ Si la respuesta es positiva, ¿Cuánta área tiene?

Si la respuesta es negativa, ¿estaría dispuesto a dejar de producir por 5 años en un área de la finca para destinarla a conservación del medio ambiente?

1.2.4 Preguntas acerca de las barreras hacia la implementación de prácticas de conservación para las aves

22. ¿Cuáles cree usted que son las razones mas importantes por las cuales los caficultores no están realizando prácticas de conservación para las aves?

23. Considerando las razones que me acaba de comentar, ¿se le ocurre alguna idea sobre como involucrar más a los caficultores para que realicen estas prácticas y conserven las aves?

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lentijo, G.M., Hostetler, M.E. Effects of a participatory bird census project on knowledge, attitudes and behaviors of coffee farmers in Colombia. Environ Dev Sustain 15, 199–223 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9383-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-012-9383-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation