Introduction

Panela, also known as non-centrifugal sugarcane, is obtained from the evaporation of sugarcane juices and used as a coloring agent or beverage (Zidan & Azlan, 2022). Its production is traditionally artisanal and is part of the local economy of many countries in Latin America, the Caribbean, Asia, and Africa (Gómez et al., 2019). Panela farmers typically cultivate the sugarcane and produce panela from its juice (Gómez & Espinosa, 2017; Ramírez & Valenciano, 2017). They are generally characterized as farmers of diverse scales with socioeconomic particularities that vary according to region (Barón & Contreras, 2020; Thibane et al., 2023).

Demand for panela has increased over the last decade (Jaffé, 2015; Martínez et al., 2018) as the growing market for healthy products has promoted panela as a natural alternative to artificial sweeteners, given its energy and nutritional properties (Eggleston et al., 2021; Sánchez, 2017). Colombia is the second largest panela-producing country in the world after India and the first in Latin America (Agronet, 2021). At the national level, the agricultural sector contributes 7% of the national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) (Finagro, 2023), with sugarcane cultivation to panela production contributing 7.8% (UPRA, 2023). This sector is the second-most important agroindustry in terms of social importance after coffee, with approximately 350,000 participating households, representing 12% of the country's economically active rural population (Minagricultura, 2019). In addition, panela is considered to be one of the most consumed products in the Colombian household diet (Agronet, 2021; Minagricultura, 2020), providing one of the main caloric sources, particularly in low-income households (Zarate et al., 2019).

Panela production has a very significant impact on rural livelihoods in the Colombian Amazon, mainly in the department of Caquetá (MinComercio, 2022), where 2,992 sugarcane producers were estimated to be operating in 2019 on approximately 4,814,000 hectares (ha) and producing 22,446,000 tons (ton) of panela annually (Fedepanela, 2020), and a yield of 5.27 ton. ha−1 (Rodriguez et al., 2020). However, these yields are below the national average (6.28 ton. ha−1 yr−1). The department of Caquetá lacks data on the characteristics of rural households linked to panela production and the identification of what may be necessary to support them.

To address this gap, we employed the community capital framework (Emery & Flora, 2006) to analyze household level characteristics in rural communities (Wang et al., 2021) to identify the potential and limitations of sugarcane for panela production as a sustainable rural livelihood in Caquetá. To this end, we address the following questions to guide our research: i) what are the characteristics of sugarcane farmers who produce panela in the department of Caquetá?; ii) what is the capital endowment of the panela-producing households?; and iii) what is the role of sugarcane cultivation for panela production in the livelihood strategy of the households? Our results provide inputs for elaborating public policies to strengthen the panela production sector, becoming the basis for materializing investments and interventions that take account of areas in need of institutional support.

Materials and Methods

Study Area and Data Collection

We conducted our study in southern Colombia in rural areas of the municipalities of El Paujil, El Doncello, Puerto Rico, and San Vicente del Caguán, located in the north of Caquetá department, one of the six departments of the Colombian Amazon. The study area contributes 42.08% of sugarcane production for panela in the department of Caquetá. This, in turn, accounts for 26.6% of the production of the Colombian Amazon region and 1.79% of national production (Agronet, 2023). It is worth noting that this region has been one of the main territories in Colombia affected by social conflicts and is marked by poverty and the presence of illicit crops. Despite these challenges, the production of panela has been increasing, becoming a strategic and viable alternative to improve the living conditions of the local population (ART, 2023). According to climatic parameters, the region is classified as a tropical rainforest zone type Af (Koppen classification), with a mean annual temperature of 25.5 °C and average precipitation of 3,793 mm (Bermeo et al., 2022). This region is the transition between the foothills of the eastern Andes Mountain and the Amazon Plain, making it a water-producing zone (Ciro, 2018) (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Location of sugarcane producers for panela in the northern part of the department of Caquetá, Colombia

Full size image

Rural households were selected based on field visits in each municipality's most productive sugarcane areas on the basis of meeting at least one of the following characteristics: i) having a sugarcane crop; or/and ii) having their own or a shared milling system to produce panela. We used a semi-structured interview to gather data from a total of 81 rural households who agreed to participate in the study (Fig. 1).

Characterization of Rural Households

Initially, we conducted the semi-structured interview with the head of each household, covering five topics, including i) household data; ii) characteristics of the farm; iii) characteristics of the production system; and iv) crop harvest; comprised 19 variables. These variables were selected on the basis of previous livelihood classification rural studies (Table 1) (Iiyama et al., 2008; Khatiwada et al., 2017; Sun et al., 2019).

Table 1 Variables considered in the semi-structured interview for sugarcane producers
Full size table

We performed a cluster analysis of this data to determine the characteristics of the sugarcane producers according to the similarity in their living conditions using Ward's method and Gower's similarity due to the presence of quantitative and qualitative variables (Balzarini et al., 2008). After obtaining the clusters, we used an analysis of variance (ANOVA) to determine the quantitative variables that influenced the separate characteristics. We analyzed continuous variables through linear mixed models (Di Rienzo et al., 2012), and discrete variables through generalized linear mixed models. We used Fisher LSD (p < 0.05) to compare means after ANOVA. Categorical variables were analyzed by generating frequencies using contingency tables (Balzarini et al., 2016). Analyses were performed using InfoStat statistical software (Di Rienzo et al., 2011) and graphics with the help of R Studio (RStudio Team, 2020).

Capital Endowment and its Relation to Rural Household Wellbeing

Rural household capital endowments were determined using the seven capitals focused on the community capital framework: human (HC), natural (NC), cultural (CC), built (BC), social (SC), political (PC), and financial (FC). This approach allows communities and community development efforts to be analyzed through seven asset-based characteristics that collectively define a community's potential for positive (Emery & Flora, 2006; Flora et al., 2004a, b; Lachapelle et al., 2020; Lima y d'Hauteserre, 2011). Most studies using this approach have been conducted at the community level (Cepeda et al., 2008; Flora, 2015; Gutiérrez-Montes, 2005) using a community capital framework at the rural household level to generate groups of households from characteristics they share in a community (Hernández-Núñez et al., 2021; Suárez et al., 2021). Likewise, we used the capital framework at the level of the sugarcane production system.

To operationalize this framework, we conducted interviews with the head of each rural household, collecting data on 54 variables spanning the seven capitals. The selection of variables was based on prior works that share similarities with our approach, taking into account the cultural and productive context of panela production in the region (Cárdenas et al., 2013a, b; Cepeda et al., 2008; Emery & Flora, 2006; Gutiérrez-Montes, 2005; Gutiérrez-Montes et al., 2009a, b; Hernández-Núñez et al., 2020a; Hernández-Núñez et al., 2021; Lachapelle et al., 2020; Lima & d'Hauteserre, 2011; Louman et al., 2016; Snider et al., 2017, Cárdenas et al., 2016; Giraldo & Salinas, 2009; Turrén-Cruz et al., 2019). An analysis of variance (quantitative variables) and contingency tables (qualitative variables) were used to determine the significant differences among the types of rural households in the 38 variables that make up the seven capitals (Hernández et al., 2014). The variables of each capital that presented significant differences (p < 0.05) among rural household types were mapped to the interval [0, 1] and summed to construct an additive index for each capital; the index was mapped again to [0, 1].

Results

Typologies of Panela Producers

Three statistically different types of panela producers were identified in the northern part of the department of Caquetá, Colombia: Avant-garde, Traditionalists, and Diversifiers (Fig. 2A). The Avant-garde (n = 33; 40.74%) cultivate sugarcane as their primary productive livelihood strategy, followed by rearing livestock (45.45%). Producers in this category have on average 17 years of experience cultivating sugarcane and exhibited the highest of technical input levels in the productive system. Producers have an average of 2.4 ha of planted sugarcane exclusively for panela, and 57.58% have their own milling process. For most producers (48.48%), milling frequency is every 15 days, employing preferably the bark of the balsa tree (Ochroma pyramidale (Cav. Ex lam.) Urb.) as a natural additive. The predominant areas for sugarcane plantations are located on hills (51.52%). The crop is fertilized twice a year with synthetic fertilizers (54.55%), and subject to mechanical weed control (78.79%) and the application of insecticides and fungicides (54.55%) (Tables 2 and 3). This typology exhibits the highest percentage of producers who are members of a sugarcane producers association (48.40%).

Fig. 2
figure 2

A Principal component analysis between household capital endowment indices and household wellbeing, according to the typology of sugarcane producers for panela. B Correlation between household capital indices and wellbeing. *Indicates correlation with p < 0.05. Community capital index (ICC), Human Capital (HC), Natural Capital (NC), Cultural Capital (CC), Built Capital (BC), Social Capital (SC), Political Capital (PC) and Financial Capital (FC)

Full size image
Table 2 Quantitative variables used for determination of the sugarcane producer typologies
Full size table
Table 3 Categorical variables used for determination of the sugarcane producer typologies
Full size table

For Traditionalists (n = 39; 48.15%), sugarcane is the second most important livelihood strategy (43.50%) relative to rearing livestock (46.10%). They have been panela producers for an average of 14 years, growing sugarcane predominantly on the mountain (41.03%), followed by hills (30,77%), and have an average of 2.83 ha of sugarcane devoted to panela production. The methods for crop management and transformation processes are predominantly artisanal. Crop management practices are minimal, with no fertilization, marginal phytosanitary control, and predominantly manual weed control. Notably, this typology has the highest number of producers with mills (84, 62%) and who employ natural additives during milling. It is noteworthy that the majority of Traditionalists are not members of any sugarcane producers associations (Tables 2 and 3).

Diversifiers (n = 9; 11.11%) have the lowest number of sugarcane producers, and most specialize in rearing livestock (55.56%), followed by sugarcane cultivation (11.10%) and pig production (11.10%). Producers have an average of 6 years of experience in the sugarcane sector, with an average of 0.23 ha of sugarcane. Unlike the other two categories, Diversifiers use sugarcane for a number of uses, most importantly as forage (44.00%), with only 11.00% for panela production. They cultivate the sugarcane predominantly on hillsides (55.56%) (Tables 2 and 3). Diversifiers’ management practices include application of fertilizers (33.33%), weed control (44.40%), and pest control (33.33%). Most Diversifiers (88.89%) do not participate in milling since they use sugarcane as a supplement to feed cattle; however, 11.11% own a mill and 33.33% have access to a communal milling source. Additionally, the majority of Diversifiers do not belong to a sugarcane producers association.

Capital Endowment and its Relation to the Wellbeing of Rural Households

Build Capital

For build capital, Avant-gardes and Traditionalists have significantly more extensive areas of sugarcane than Diversifiers. For all three types, livestock represents a considerable proportion of farm assets (Table 4). Most producers have access to basic electricity and water supply, including water for domestic consumption from springs or cisterns. Diversifiers face more limitations, such as access to land, water, financial resources, machinery and equipment, and access to agricultural inputs and roads. However, they have higher mobile phone connection (75%) than Avant-gardes and Traditionalists (50%). Finally, although a high percentage of all three categories own their land, leasing land is also not an uncommon form of land tenure, with Diversifiers having the highest lease percentage (22.22%) (Table 5).

Table 4 Endowment of categories of each quantitative variable of the capitals in each rural household
Full size table
Table 5 Endowment of categories of each qualitative variable of the capitals in each rural household
Full size table

Natural Capital

Pastureland predominates among all three types of producers. However, Diversifiers have the largest areas of improved pasture areas, with an average of 17.56 ha, consistent with their main livelihood of cattle raising (Table 4). Avant-gardes’ and Diversifiers’ lands are primarily hilly (50% and 77.78% respectively). Traditionalists have the largest landholding in mountain and foothill areas. Importantly, all three have water sources on their property (Table 5).

Political Capital

Avant-gardes have the highest percentage of attention from government groups (50%), followed by Diversifiers (22.22%) and Traditionalists (15%) (Table 5). A similar trend is observed in participation in government initiatives, although there are fewer differences among the groups. All three groups acknowledge the role of the Community Action Board, which is linked to the capacity for local decision making, empowering the community and promoting community development to enhance the quality of life of its members. However, Diversifiers stand out as the only group in which all members recognize this entity as important (Tables 4 and 5).

Cultural Capital

Avant-gardes have the longest experience as sugarcane producers (16 years), more than double the experience of Diversifiers (6 years) (Table 4). Most sugarcane producers do not identify with any ethnic group; however, a small proportion of Avant-garde producers identified as Afro-Colombians (Colombians of African descent) or indigenous (natives of the territory). Moreover, 9.38% of Avant-gardes identified as displaced since they were compelled to leave their original residence. Approximately 70% of our informants were born in Caquetá; the rest have mixed origins, coming principally from departments located in the center and south-center of Colombia (Table 5). In all three groups, producers engaged in the conservation of water resources, mainly through ecosystem conservation and reforestation. A high percentage of Diversifiers do not implement any strategy for the conservation of water resources. Interestingly, however, Diversifiers indicated the most willingness to change positively and participate in our study (Table 5).

Social Capital

All three groups recognize the community action boards as crucial in their respective villages (100% Avant-gardes and Traditionalists and 88.89% Diversifiers). However, the same importance is not given to the sugarcane producer associations (≤ 50%) (Table 5). Avant-gardes have the highest number of participants in sugarcane producer associations, followed by Diversifiers, but Traditionalists with only 12.5 (Table 5).

Financial Capital

Avant-gardes produce the highest yield of panela, followed by the Traditionalists (Table 4). Curiously, Diversifiers were the only group that did not maximize the sugarcane they produced, using only a minor proportion for panela production (Table 5).

Human Capital

All three groups have similar demographics, with three or four family members with an equal proportion of men and women. The literacy level is higher among Diversifiers, followed by Avant-gardes; however, there are no statistical differences among groups (Table 4). The ages of diversifier women and children are lower than the other group. Avant-gardes have the highest level of education, with an average of 6 years at school, and Traditionalists have the lowest, with an average of 5 years (Table 4). There is generally low participation in training programs for all three categories; however, this is much lower among Traditionalists and Diversifiers. Men participate more than women in training programs (Table 5). Avant-gardes employ more hired labor whereas Traditionalists rely on household labor, and Diversifiers employ both and also participate in shared community labor force schemes (Table 5).

The Avant-gardes have the highest capital endowment compared to Traditionalists and Diversifiers. The natural, build, financial, human, and political capitals showed differences among the three groups of panela producers (p < 0.05) (Fig. 2A).

The first two components have an eigenvalue greater than 1 and were chosen from the PCA of the matrix of the variables measured in the capital indexes to explain the behavior of the different groups of the original variability. The effect of the types of sugarcane producers on the capital indexes was significant (p < 0.0001) and explained 59.7% of the variability of the data in the first two components of the total variance according to the Monte Carlo test (McCulloch, 1997) (Fig. 2A).

The capitals with the highest contribution to the separation of sugarcane producers are more concentrated in the Avant-garde producers. Cultural and social capitals contribute the least to separating the three typologies (Fig. 2A). The endowment of the capital indexes and the effect of the type of sugar cane producer for panela explain the significant difference (p < 0.005) in the positive correlation between the capitals and their contribution to the growth and strengthening of rural producers. The capital with the highest correlation compared to the other capitals is human capital, which positively correlates with political, built, financial, and social capital with significant differences: 0.00–0.01–0.02 and 0.00, respectively. At the same time, positive correlations are found between political and social capital (0.04), natural and built capital (0.00), and finally between financial capital and cultural and built capital (0.00). The positive correlation between the capitals indicates the proportional growth and mutual assistance for the continuous development among the assets owned by the producers (Fig. 2B).

Discussion

Types of Sugarcane Producers

We found significant differences in the experience of producers in panela production and the hectares designated for sugarcane production. In our study, all sugarcane producers for panela are categorized as small producers since their farm size falls below the threshold defined as a family agricultural unit in the department of Caquetá, Colombia (INCODER, 2008). Similar studies conducted with small coffee and cocoa producers have also used variables such as educational level, extension services, land tenure consolidation, diversification, technological level, and improved cropping systems to establish producer typologies (Bhattarai et al., 2017; Bubala et al., 2018; Ngango & Kim, 2019). Due to the particularity of the panela production process, our results underscore the importance of variables such as crop management, geographic relief, and processes and materials used in the production of panela.

The Avant-garde producers with the highest ascending relationship with the capital index have an average of 17 years of experience in panela production, have better crop management, and most have their own facilities for panela production, which allows them to diversify their products and have greater participation and relevance in the market (Palacios-Meléndez et al., 2018). According to Cañizares-Arevalo (2015), the mechanization of the sugarcane agroindustry is considered the most viable and effective strategy for generating business and income for rural households. Variables such as willingness to change indicate the interest of the three groups in the improvement of sugarcane cultivation and processing techniques, which will allow, through project development, support, and training, the improvement of the productive system and the improvement of the living conditions of rural small-scale farming households (Páez-Reyes et al., 2013).

Types of Sugarcane Producers According to the Role of Sugarcane Cultivation in Their Livelihood Strategies

Despite the heterogeneity of the study area, sugarcane producers show significant differences. Sugarcane cultivation is the main livelihood for Avant-gardes and Traditionalists. Interestingly, all producers have other sources of financing and support within their households, integrating the diversification of different crops and production systems to improve their wellbeing and avoid financial risk and vulnerability through the construction of better assets and integrated systems, thus accomplishing economic sustainability (Bock, 2004; Gautam & Andersen, 2016; McNally, 2001). Similarly, research conducted in Nepal by Barbieri and Mahoney (2009) identified diversifying productive systems would favor rural households since it would improve financial returns and mitigate family economic risk. Sugarcane to produce panela is recognized as a traditional crop that plays an essential role in sustaining rural households (Arana et al., 2016).

The Avant-garde group evinces willingness to improve cultivation practices through training and technical assistance, which are classified as strengthening human capital, thus generating improvements for the wellbeing of rural households through dynamic livelihood strategies (Zhang et al., 2019). Human capital has been referred to as the asset with the most significant upward potential and continuous improvement (Emery & Flora, 2006), for which education is one of the most important tools (Nielsen et al., 2013). Education has been a widely recognized variable within the diversification of producers and rural households as an instrument of great importance for development and diversification (Bhandari, 2013).

Synergies Between Capital and Livelihoods

Livelihood strategies connect assets and their outcomes through an income-generating sequence. Studies related to livelihoods and capital have indicated the importance of human capital as an asset that influences livelihoods and the other capitals that make up the livelihood spiral of rural producers and households in the region (Emery & Flora, 2006; Gutierrez-Montes et al., 2009a; Hernández-Núñez et al., 2020b). Human capital (knowledge, labor in the cultivation and tenure that the human being possesses), social capital (associativity and knowledge transfer), cultural capital (continuity and willingness to change), and political capital (participation in community activities and importance of the community action board) integrate the assets as a basis for the development of the communities.

The directly proportional relationship between cultural and build capital (Fonseca et al., 2019) allows us to highlight in this study factors such as tradition, transfer of knowledge and tenure of inputs, technology, and methods of transformation of sugarcane into panela traditionally and naturally, as a fundamental contribution of their facilities and physical means concerning their traditions and crop management inherited through the generations. At the same time, the relationship and association with financial capital, understood as the capacity that the producer has in the diversification of its process of transformation of the raw material (Nielsen et al., 2013), is classified as a differential factor in the manufacture of products derived from sugarcane (Fierros & Ávila-Foucat, 2017), as we identified in the different groups of producers and is related to the tradition and transfer of knowledge of sugarcane cultivation within the rural households of the northern zone of the department of Caquetá. Community work activities and membership in the community action board can increase and strengthen mutual trust through the recognition of neighbors, contribution and transfer of knowledge to relatives and neighbors, processes of solidary between "natives" and "foreigners" who now share the same space, concerns, and collective interests (Sastoque, 2013), evidencing the synergy between the political and cultural capital perceived in the area.

Other results show that the positive relationship and cooperation between capitals, such as political and social, through community action boards and knowledge delivery through connections with neighbors, friends, and relatives function as an effective chain of knowledge of traditional and mechanical activities developed by sugarcane producers. These activities show that traditional practices become capital when they are used to achieve objectives (Singgalen et al., 2019). Their contribution through physical capital is concentrated in land tenure and access to resources, a strength identified in the Avant-garde producers, who exhibited a greater number of producers with legal property titles. Studies on territorial dynamics and new perceptions of livelihoods suggest access to land as a comparative advantage in appropriating assets and possibilities for rural development (Vargas, 2009).

Rural development is conceived as the increase in the potential of physical capital (Buciega & Esparcia, 2013). Such cumulative action of tools and assets is markedly evidenced in the Avant-garde group, which has a greater possibility to invest in and own a more significant number of elements for development and growth. The facilities and tools for communal and private milling are the most important investments for rural producers. This productive infrastructure has meaningful participation within rural households as a strategy to improve their wellbeing through the diversification and use of productive spaces (Fierros & Ávila-Foucat, 2017).

Importantly, studies refer to the relevance of associations and their influence on rural livelihoods through networks and associations of traders and producers that are fundamental for the development of the productive system and provide greater access to the market (Bobadilla et al., 2019; Bradbear, 2005; Zuluaga-Sánchez & Arango-Vargas, 2013). Government authorities, legislators, and official trade associations have promoted different institutional channels for this form of social participation. Additionally, laws have been approved to encourage associative activities, such as Law 2005 of December 2, 2019 (GNC, 2019). The inclusion of trade union policies in the different objectives of the strategic plan drawn up by FEDEPANELA (the leading Panela association in the region), named "Towards sustainability and modernization of the trade union and sector" 2018–2022, aims to promote building social capital through the strengthening of agribusiness organizations linked to it (Fedepanela, 2018). Our results can be used to understand the regional heterogeneity, assets, and context of vulnerability faced by sugarcane producers in the northern part of the department of Caquetá from an integral vision to extend the sustainability strategies and decisions made by rural households and producers.

Conclusions and Perspectives

Sugarcane cultivation for the production of panela in the northern part of the department of Caquetá has been characterized by an artisanal milling transformation system. The knowledge processes have been passed down from generation to generation, making sugarcane cultivation the primary source of rural livelihoods. We identify three groups of panela producers with differing requirements for policies aimed at promoting sustainable livelihoods and development.

Institutional efforts to strengthen the panela sector in Colombia must go beyond investment in establishing new areas of cultivation by expanding built and natural capital and include: i) strengthening agronomic techniques for crop management (human and built capital); ii) promoting the participation of producers in local organizations and developing training strategies for producers; iii) promoting access to knowledge of producers to address market demands for quality and safety of the finished product; and iv) raising awareness of the importance of sugarcane cultivation for panela in the livelihood strategy of producers and their households.

We used a livelihoods approach complemented by the community capital framework at the level of rural producers to conduct an integral analysis of the current state of panela producers that goes beyond the strictly economic and integrates their environment and wellbeing. The current state of sugarcane cultivation to produce panela is described in differentiated access to capital resources. Producers with greater crop development have consolidated more and better human and built capital as the main driving factor.

Our study examines the challenges experienced by small rural producers to identify strategies that address their needs through rural development policies. In addition, our research empowers producers by providing them with a conceptual foundation to propose and construct feasible and efficient development strategies with governmental and other organizations concerned with environmental sustainability in the face of ongoing climate change.

It is important to note that we were unable to include a section of the rural population in the region that is also engaged in sugarcane cultivation to produce panela due to logistical and social difficulties accessing the area. This highlights the necessity for further studies in other sugarcane-producing regions to allow for a more comprehensive assessment of the sugarcane sector, identifying both common and unique characteristics that can contribute to understanding and improving production systems. Nevertheless, we believe that our results and conclusions generate valuable directions for future research into questions such as the development of livelihood strategies alongside sugarcane cultivation to support rural communities and expanding the marketing of panela beyond traditional uses. Future research results will further enhance our understanding of the role of this crop in rural household livelihood strategies and its contribution to their wellbeing.