Introduction

Identifying more sustainable land use alternatives requires a better understanding of the complex and intertwined processes of land use changes. Although land use changes have been well documented across the world, particularly in the tropics (Lambin et al. 2003), there is a lack of contextual generalizations describing and explaining the conditions that trigger, enable, or prevent favorable trends of land use change for implementing on the ground (Carvalho et al. 2020; Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010).

While landscape ecology as a holistic discipline has been extensively borrowing hypotheses and principles from social sciences such as geography and demography, it generally fails to give adequate attention to social processes on the land, namely by addressing institutional change as an integral part of landscape change (Field et al. 2003). To overcome the implementation gap, actors and their representative institutions need to find shared solutions and work collaboratively to further implement desirable and agreed landscape futures (Buchecker et al. 2021). This is a necessary premise for creating a reliable and generalized knowledge of land use change (Meyfroidt et al. 2018; Turner et al. 2020).

Scenario approaches were widely used as a means of integrating the science of landscape ecology for exploring more sustainable land uses (Börjeson et al. 2006; Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Hobbs 1997; Leventon et al. 2019; Sitas et al. 2019; Tress and Tress 2003; Van Berkel et al. 2011). Scenario refers to the different possible stories or alternative assumptions that underlie landscape change (Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010). In landscape scenarios, the alternative futures are spatially explicit through representations of land cover patterns in maps, digital imaging simulations, or even drawings (Iverson Nassauer and Corry 2004). Landscape scenarios bring in implications for policy, allowing decision-makers, experts, and the broader public to literally “see” the range of possible land use alternatives across landscapes (Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Dupont et al. 2015; Van Berkel et al. 2011).

Engaging a group of people through participatory landscape scenarios makes stakeholders more aware of society-nature interactions and helps to discuss stakeholders’ land use preferences and ambitions. This helps to analyze how preferred land uses could be allocated across “their” landscape (Aguiar et al. 2020; Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Iverson Nassauer and Corry 2004; Reed 2008; Reed et al. 2013; Tress and Tress 2003; Van Berkel et al. 2011). Trade-offs and synergies can be assessed by evaluating changes in land use and various ecosystem services and their combined effects on fulfilling landscape stakeholder ambitions (Reed et al. 2013). Spatial modeling of alternative future scenarios proved to be a suitable catalyst for building landscape partnerships and for bringing to the surface stakeholder assumptions, analyses, and negotiations around strategy, production and resource management practices, and spatial planning (Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Van Berkel et al. 2011). Scenarios based on integrated approaches co-designed by stakeholders from multiple sectors demonstrate the potential to achieve progress towards landscape sustainability (Chopin et al. 2019; Reed 2008; Reed et al. 2013).

Despite a wide variety of empirical case studies, research and practice in landscape ecology have been falling behind in interpreting, modeling, predicting, and developing knowledge for helping to influence the behavior of social agents, including governmental and non-governmental institutions, in moving towards more sustainable land uses across tropical landscapes. Particularly missing are scenario tools to aid in understanding the spatial heterogeneity of actors and institutions, land use policy, and environmental factors in order to determine where different types of rural development can be implemented in the context of buffer zones of protected areas in tropical landscapes.

This gap is particularly noticeable in Brazil. While Brazil has placed most of its conservation efforts in protected areas, it is especially challenging to effectively address the consequences of unfavorable land use changes across its buffer zones (Vieira et al. 2019). While scenarios from the ‘conservation arena’ literature have been focusing on empirically determining what works in conservation, those often do not include detailed descriptions of the institutional and governance arrangements, including actors, policies, institutions (rules and norms) needed for implementing on the ground land uses that are associated to conservation and development strategies that might succeed (Chopin et al. 2019; Cumming and Epstein 2020; Kremen and Merenlender 2018).

Landscape approaches have been used for balancing and making explicit the trade-offs within conservation objectives and development agendas (Arts et al. 2017; Reed et al. 2020, 2016; Sayer et al. 2013). Such approaches have taken a ‘whole-landscape’ approach (Dolman et al. 2001) for reconciling conservation and development based on the premise that there will be both winners and losers and that such synergies and trade-offs must be identified, negotiated and accounted for (Sayer et al. 2013). Landscape approaches focus on ten principles as defined by Sayer et al. (2013), including: continual learning and adaptive management, common concern entry point, multiple scales, multifunctionality, multiple stakeholders, negotiated and transparent change logic, clarification of rights and responsibilities, participatory and user-friendly monitoring, resilience, strengthened stakeholder capacity. It is important to assess which of the ten landscape approaches premises have been successfully established in case studies and which are not implemented and are still barriers to progress towards land uses that are preferred by stakeholders. This learning experience is critical for consolidating social theories and institutional analysis within the field of landscape ecology. So far, few studies in landscape ecology have explicitly considered the constraints that ecosystem heterogeneity might impose on policy-making and institutional design (Cumming and Epstein 2020). This is especially the case in a participatory context where the focus is on the aspirations and achievements of less advantaged stakeholders, who are, by default, not well represented in the formal decision-making processes.

This paper addresses the following questions: Is there a set of preferred scenarios for land use change? By using the ten principles as defined by Sayer et al. (2013), what triggers, enables, and prevents the implementation of preferred land uses? And, ultimately, what did we learn by using participatory landscape scenarios?

Methods

In order to answer these questions, the paper synthesizes knowledge from a long-term case study in the buffer zone of the Rio Doce State Park (Parque Estadual Rio Doce-PERD) in Brazil. Figure 1 shows the workflow and major research phases. The scenario development started in 2017 with field work visits and the development of the land use simulation model that was used in the first workshop. In 2018, the stakeholder engagement phases comprised two local workshops held in each one of the four municipalities and a final workshop gathering the participants of the four municipalities together in the Rio Doce park headquarters. For the final workshop, in addition to local stakeholders, private companies (pulp industry and others) and governmental institutions (municipalities, agriculture, education and tourism institutions) participated. Together with stakeholder engagement tools the work includes two different spatially explicit modelling approaches: (1) A Land Use Land Cover Change (LUCC) simulation modelFootnote 1 was developed and used in the initial workshop (2017) to prompt the discussions about past and future land use transitions (Oliveira et al. 2020a, 2020b). (2) During the second and third workshops Multi Criteria Analysis (MCA) was used to map the biophysical suitability of the selected municipalities for the preferred land uses as seen by stakeholders (2018).

Fig. 1
figure 1

Timeline of the participatory process and research stages

Full size image

After characterizing the study area (In “Study area” Section) and the scenario development process (2.2) the ten principles by Sayer et al. (2013) were used for exploring the conditions that trigger, enable or prevent the implementation of preferred scenarios and associated land uses (2.3). Following, we synthesize knowledge on research and practice for working towards sustainable landscapes in the context of the buffer area of the Rio Doce State Park in Brazil.

Study area

The Rio Doce is one of the largest rivers (850 km long) in Southeast Brazil (Fig. 2). Over 3 million people spread across 229 municipalities live in the region. With a drainage area of 86,725 km2, the Atlantic Forest remnants occupy around 11% to 16% of the original native vegetation. Many of the municipalities where native vegetation has been lost present high poverty rates and/or low levels of socio-economic development. Over 50% of the area of the river basin is human-altered (Fig. 2, left), comprising agriculture, small-scale farming and pastures. The scarce and declining presence of native vegetation and protected areas poses a major challenge for sustainable landscape management in the region.

Fig. 2
figure 2

Study area

Full size image

Rio Doce State Park is the largest remnant of Atlantic forests in the state of Minas Gerais occupying an area of approximately 36 000 ha (map in the right of Fig. 2). It has the second largest wetland area in South America after the Pantanal. In 2015, the region experienced the devastating effects of a large mining dam break that released a wave of mud into the river basin across the states of Minas Gerais and Espírito Santo. The dam breach devastated villages, caused the shutdown of water supply services in several cities, and disrupted fishing and other activities directly dependent on the river (Fernandes et al. 2016; Pires et al. 2017). After the dam failure, the federal public prosecutor and several government bodies and local stakeholders reached an agreement with the mining companies to mitigate and compensate for the social and environmental impacts across the basin. A new governance framework and foundation (Renova) were created to implement a public–private agreement called the TTAC (Terms of Transaction of Adjustment of Conduct). The new governance arrangement agreed on the necessary interventions to be made over an allocated ten-year time frame. Actions should be designed to restore the prevailing ecological system and to enhance local livelihoods, hence contributing to local adaptation and sustainable development of the watershed. Restoration priority areas were designed to include agroforestry systems as an option for restoring the whole landscape (Carvalho Ribeiro et al. 2020).

Rio Doce State Park is one of the sites of the International Long-Term Ecological Research Network (ILTER). While the park has been able to halt land use change within its boundaries, its 10 km buffer zone has experienced loss of native vegetation and land degradation (Fig. 2 right).

Stakeholder engagement and the development of participatory landscape scenarios were established in four municipalities (Revés do Belém, Pingo d´Água, Córrego Novo, and Dionísio Fig. 2 map on the right) (see detailed description of the work conducted in each municipality in the supplementary material. These municipalities were selected due to their different land use transition profiles (Oliveira et al. 2020a, b). In some areas, the major land use transitions are from forest to eucalyptus silviculture, while others are from forest to degraded pasture and agricultural land, yet in other major land use change is geared toward urbanization.

Participatory landscape scenarios

In the first workshop, the results of the LUCC model was shown and explained to participants. This work previously developed by Oliveira et al (2020a, b) quantifies the land use transitions that occurred in the last 20 years and shows a simulation of land use change trends up to 2030. The land use simulation model showed that if past trends continue over the next decades, there will be a loss of native forest, agricultural areas likely will be converted into degraded lands and intensive silviculture, which would compromise human well-being and the future socio-economic development of the region. A brainstorming session was guided by the following questions: “If we don’t want the past land trends such as land degradation to be continued in the future, then what are other possible preferred and desirable land uses for the region?” and “Which activities and associated land uses do you think will best suit the interests of the region?” This discussion aimed to encourage participants to take ownership and to contribute with their opinions. In the same workshop, the participatory mapping process was elaborated with local actors, taking into account the ideas of futures suggested by the participants. In the form of drawings or texts, participants were encouraged to insert them on the printed map of the region.

The second workshop was used to further elaborate on the skeleton of their scenario visions from the first workshop and present the first results of the land use suitability analysis using MCA to stakeholders. The main goal of the land use suitability modeling was to assess if there was biophysical potential in the area of the municipalities for implementing the preferred land uses. This made stakeholders understand trade-offs. For example, they might prefer one activity to which there is no biophysical potential in the region. This second workshop bridged the knowledge of local communities with local experts in environmental modeling.

For mapping both the land use cover change trends and the biophysical potential for the preferred land, Dinamica EGO (https://csr.ufmg.br/dinamica/) was used. In the MCA, the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) has been widely used to support decision making by using repeated comparisons of spatially explicit layers (variables considered important for allocating different land use activities) pair by pair (Saaty, 1987). The first step comprises the selection of geospatial layers that either favor or hamper the suitability of the land for the land use activity that stakeholders consider desirable. In the second step, the relative importance is assigned between the different layers in a pairwise comparison matrix (eigenvalue, consistency index, and consistency ratio). In the third step, the importance weights for each variable are generated. The detailed description of the stakeholder engagement process in the different municipalities and the details of the land use suitability models are described in the supplementary material (SM 1 to 3).

Explaining the conditions that trigger, enable or prevent the implementation of preferred landscape scenarios

The third workshop discussed the enabling conditions that would most likely deliver those preferred land use scenarios. In this workshop, the participants filled in a plan for action, identifying: “What actions need to be implemented? By whom? And whose resources (financial and human) are needed?” The analysis of the “plan for action” for implementing the preferred scenarios together with the reasons for scenario selection and the arguments raised that likely trigger and enable scenario implementation allowed the research team to associate the Rio Doce case study with the ten premises by Sayer et al. (2013). We discuss which of the ten premises have been successfully established in the Rio Doce case study and which are not implemented and are still barriers to progress towards land uses that are preferred by stakeholders. This might contribute to frame the Rio Doce case study experience and potentially translating it into different contexts where similar challenges related to land use change dynamics might be encountered.

Therefore the preferred scenarios as selected by stakeholders were associated to the ten principles as defined by Sayer et al. (2013): continual learning and adaptive management, common concern entry point, multiple scales, multifunctionality, multiple stakeholders, negotiated and transparent change logic, clarification of rights and responsibilities, participatory and user-friendly monitoring, resilience, strengthened stakeholder capacity.

Results

Preferred scenarios for land use change

The participating stakeholders identified four desirable landscape scenarios during the workshop: Agroforestry, Animal Husbandry, Restoring degraded lands/Conservation and Tourism development (Fig. 3).

Fig. 3
figure 3

Summary of the desired landscape scenarios, its land uses and institutional governance arrangements

Full size image

According to stakeholders, the preference for those land uses was mainly triggered by the ability of the selected land uses to generate local income and to restore degraded land, enhancing environmental quality, water provision and conservation of the native forests. In the views of stakeholders, those land use scenarios were placed within two major axes: income generation and environmental quality (conservation). Agroforestry and tourism development were placed into the first quadrant, as likely to deliver both higher incomes and more nature conservation. Animal husbandry in the second quadrant has smaller associations with conservation but is linked with higher land use rents. The restoration/conservation scenario was ranked high on the conservation axis but associated with lower rents and was initially placed in the third quadrant. In discussing this, the stakeholders pointed out that the PERD buffer area needs land use futures that reconcile income to local communities and conservation. Therefore, according to stakeholders’ preferences, the restoration & conservation scenario was merged with the scenario of tourism development. Those two scenarios were placed in the fourth quadrant, so consequently, none of the scenarios were placed in the third quadrant as the stakeholders considered that PERD needs to move away from futures that are associated with both low conservation and land rents.

Above all, the stakeholder engagement process revealed that the municipalities surrounding PERD lack basic infrastructure, mainly health care, education, and transport. Stakeholders had difficulties in acknowledging the positive benefits that the park might bring to their livelihoods. They often reported on the restrictions on access and use of natural resources and on the lack of identity between communities involved and park management. There are too loose liaisons with the private sector. For example, a large share of land in the buffer area of the park is managed by pulp and steel industry companies. These companies have social responsibility actions to foster the socio-economy of the region. Furthermore, agriculture, mostly sugar cane plantations and husbandry, is prominent.

There were different preferences for land use changes in the four municipalities where the scenarios were developed. While in some areas animal husbandry was the most preferred land use scenario, other municipalities selected agroforestry or preferred to reconcile conservation and tourism. A description of the preferences in the four different municipalities is presented in detail in the supplementary material. Putting those scenarios together in the park buffer zone will deliver a lively ‘working landscape’ where low-intensity agriculture and animal husbandry provide the food for an emerging tourism sector. Stakeholders called for complementary land uses in order to create a multifunctional landscape where conservation fosters tourism and agroforestry, and animal husbandry qualifies tourism experiences with local foodstuff, enhances biodiversity conservation, and provides ecosystem services such as water and soil regulation.

Implementing desirable futures: what triggers, enables or prevents the implementation of preferred land uses?

Agroforestry

Above all, agroforestry is associated with the creation of new sources of employment and income that can add value to local traditional livelihoods. Stakeholders acknowledge that, for centuries, the soil in the Rio Doce basin has been used for economic purposes, promoting several productive chains (mining and pulp industry). However, numerous environmental impacts currently concern the communities linked to this region. The Rio Doce Valley is one of the regions with the highest occurrence of degraded areas in Minas Gerais and has long lived with a problem of depletion of water sources. The agroforestry scenario was therefore selected because stakeholders associate it with local income generation and environmental conservation and, notably, its positive associations with water-related ecosystem services.

In the region, agroforestry can be associated with integrated cultivation of perennial woody species with other agricultural and livestock crops in shared spaces and in multifunctional land use. These different types of agroforestry systems can vary in their arrangements (spatial and temporal), physiognomy, floristic composition, functional role of components and ecological aspects, system management, production objectives, and predominant socio-economic characteristics. Regarding the potential contribution of agroforestry to the conservation of biodiversity, agroforestry systems are believed to likely increase the number and area of native species, increase economic resilience, and favor connections between forest fragments. Stakeholders also believe that agroforestry systems will reduce economic pressure on native forests and encourage the reforestation of deforested areas.

The land use model shows that more than 41% of the total park area (that is fifteen thousand hectares out of 36 000 of the park area alone) are suitable for agroforestry in the region surrounding the Rio Doce State Park. These areas in the surrounding of the PERD are human-altered rural areas, situated close to highways, within Permanent Preservation Areas (PPA) and with low vegetation index. Although the spatial explicit model can be further refined, namely by incorporating other variables (e.g. land ownership), we believe that this tool is a convincing starting point.

There are 40 institutions listed in the region, from private and public sectors, which are implementing the land use activities associated with the preferred scenarios (SM2). 11 (27,5%) of the governmental and non-governmental institutions are financing agroforestry. For example, the Forestry Institute (IEF Instituto Estadual de Florestas), Fundação Renova, provides funding while EMATER offers technical support on the field. However, there are spatial overlaps across land uses and actors & institutions. The land suitability model shows that there are areas now allocated to silviculture, with agroforestry potential ranging from medium to high. If this is negotiated amongst the pulp industry, cooperative work between businesses and communities could be encouraged in these locations. In addition, areas that have very high agricultural potential have also been urbanizing.

The land use intensification deriving from silviculture and its associated land use change and the urbanization trends have an impact on the lacustrine system. The lacustrine system, which includes dozens of natural lagoons, has been suffering from anthropogenic land use pressures. Whether public or private areas, it is suggested that the lagoons and their immediate surroundings receive special attention regarding conservation and potential areas for agroforestry and tourism can be considered. Another alternative, given the respective demand, could be the development of product chains of native species such as palmito. In this way, economic and environmental functions could be promoted in the regions, encompassing social and cultural landscape functions by involving both local communities and visitors.

Animal husbandry

The stakeholders preferred the scenario of animal husbandry because it associates agricultural production with livestock grazing in order to promote food production, generating jobs and income. In addition, it may also support gastronomic and ecological tourism in the region. The Rio Doce area is traditionally a milk production basin where small-scale farmers are predominant. Animal husbandry has been associated with livelihoods for decades. The problem so far is that there are no strategies yet for adding value to animal husbandry products and that the income of thousands of small-scale farmers generated by animal husbandry is very low. The stakeholder engagement raised the awareness that trade-offs should be made to reach better income generation results and enhance environmental conservation. One of the needs is to restrict the areas for animal husbandry production to places with medium to high biophysical potential. The land use model for animal husbandry shows that 20% of the municipality of Bom Jesus do Galho (where this scenario was the most preferred- see supplementary material) holds high biophysical potential. Initially, the stakeholders considered the 20% estimate of high biophysical potential for animal husbandry too low. Looking at the areas on the map and after several discussions, they acknowledged that the development of this activity in less favorable areas might be associated with a low economic return. It is worth mentioning that the National System of Nature Conservation Units (SNUC) highlights that the Conservation Unit Management Plan can integrate conservation with economic and social activities together with infrastructure development. We listed at least 9 out of 40 (22,5%) institutions working on family farming and animal husbandry investments in the region (SM2). Those include rural syndicates, Serviço Nacional de Aprendizagem Rural (SENAR), Municipal Secretaries of Agriculture and Economic Development.

Land restoration/conservation & tourism

In order to negotiate land for conservation, the stakeholders highlighted that conservation land uses might be well reconciled with tourism activities. Merging them together and attending to the biophysical potential of each location, the landscape functions can be reconciled in different types of landscapes that work for people and nature (Kremen and Merenlender 2018). Pasture and agriculture areas with low to moderate levels of degradation can be reforested using agroforestry. Trade of agricultural products and guided tours encouraging gastronomic tourism can be developed in these places. In the silviculture areas, intercropping and activities such as beekeeping, which is already present around the park, are feasible as well. There are 27 (out 40) institutions (67,5%) that sponsor conservation initiatives. Those include the PERD, Renova Foundation and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) (SM2).

Institutional arrangement and governance for implementing preferred land uses

This section explores how actors and their institutions mobilize to implement the preferred land use scenarios. The third workshop developed a working plan for implementing the preferred land uses. In this workshop, 40 institutions that operate in the Rio Doce Park area were listed (supplementary material). Although there are governmental and non-governmental organizations and funds, there are still difficulties in implementing the preferred land use futures on the ground. For example, to foster land uses such as agroforestry in the city of Bom Jesus do Galho, extensionist programs (EMATER) developed discussions on family farming, adding issues on the planting of vegetables, production of greengrocers, and the creation of a local market. Discussions with local farmers about the program operation also included technical assistance activities, rural extension of project adherence, diagnostic steps, participatory management plan elaboration, market prospecting, and individual and collective services. Other actions of the city hall already in progress were corn silage, grass, and sugar cane to ensure the feeding of herds in Bom Jesus do Galho, ploughing the land to assist rural producers, technical guidance from the extension programs governmental body (EMATER) and delivery of poultry at more affordable prices to producers in the region, supporting poultry farming to increase household income through the production of meat and eggs. The Social Assistance Reference Center—(CRAS) was carrying out training activities. EMATER, in cooperation with the Bank of Brazil Foundation and the city hall, disclosed the monitoring and fencing of springs in the rural area of the municipality. Also sponsored by the RENOVA foundation, land restoration has been steadily progressing. The City Hall's institutional website also linked the project to the Sustainable Development Goals that are part of the United Nations' Agenda with goals for the year 2030. In relation to social interaction, the public sector, together with the Renova Foundation and Instituto Elos carried out in the Revés do Belém District a joint effort that resulted in the construction of a square for the community next to the state school and the renovated court next to the football field.

These ongoing actions lead us to believe that this process is under development and its evaluation will have to be continuous over the next few years. All the initiatives that have been carried out so far have been previously discussed within the scope of the discussed project, and it can be said that, although in a modest way, this participatory process allowed the local reality to change. This result of a large number of initiatives occurring after the implementation of this participatory process can be considered a very positive gain, given the social context of the area before the realization of this project.

Despite a positive experience, it was clear from the governance workshop that some actors, for example, steel and pulp production industries as well as urban development agencies, are well structured and represented in the local policy making settings. On the contrary, the majority of the mainstream organizations in agroforestry or tourism, for example, nurseries of native plants, are scarce and not well represented in the basin. Furthermore, those governmental actors traditionally work in hierarchical sectors such as forestry (IEF) and urban development. Even more problematic is that institutions mainly operate on a project-by-project basis. Most of the projects are planned and implemented without the emphasis on empowering local communities so that these communities are able to guide their purposes when a project ends. Furthermore, the institutional capacity to bridge sectors and to operate at the landscape scale for implementing desired landscape scenarios bridging across urban and rural areas to foster the region as a whole is not yet in place.

Moreover, we found that no institutional leader is yet able to reconcile the implementation of a diverse set of land use activities such as agroforestry or animal husbandry and to reconcile tourism and conservation in an integrated way at the landscape scale in the Rio Doce buffer area. When asked who would lead the implementation of those integrated land use scenarios, the communities mentioned the municipality councils. The municipalities in the region can bring together their land use zones that are seen as more sustainable by local stakeholders in their master plan. One of the problems is that some of the municipalities lack human resources and technical capacities to develop their master plans and land zones. Furthermore, it was also acknowledged that the development of markets for the different activities (tourism, agroforestry products, etc.) should be implemented at the landscape (regional) scale, integrating several municipalities. However, there is not yet an institutional body that reconciles rural development activities across different municipalities with these agroforestry and tourism drivers of development.

In view of the meetings held with local actors and research partners, this participatory process may be the starting point to influence sectoral integration across the region. One example is the company in the cellulose branch that showed interest in contributing to the development of the region. Indeed, the scenario development process created cooperation and partnerships across communities and public and private institutions. The time investment that is needed to involve, mobilize, establish, and maintain bonds of trust with the community and to reduce skepticism towards some local actors were difficulties that existed throughout the participatory process that need to be overcome.

Discussion: what did we learn by using participatory landscape scenarios?

Scenarios for land use change

The results showed that using participatory landscape scenarios in Rio Doce was helpful in framing, selecting, and agreeing upon four preferred land uses such as agroforestry, husbandry, conservation areas, and touristic areas. However, they also showed the difficulties within the field from moving from scenario development to effectively implementing more sustainable land uses on the ground (Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Hobbs 1997; Tress and Tress 2003; Van Berkel et al. 2011). The experiences emerging from this case study and the participation in governance forums for over eight years (2016–2023) in the Rio Doce highlight that, while landscape ecology helps in envisioning desirable scenarios and landscape approaches help in discussing and reconciling different interests and common entry points (Buchecker et al. 2021), there is not yet in place actors and institutional capacity to implement those preferred land uses on the ground.

The scope of landscape ecology needs to be further refined and include approaches for characterizing people, social organizational structure, and social relations on the land (Field et al. 2003). This knowledge may be synthesized into theory and practice within the landscape ecology field to support progress towards sustainable land use alternatives (Bennett et al. 2021; Meyfroidt et al. 2018; Turner et al. 2020).

In summary, the participatory process was helpful for developing landscape scenarios that, in turn, can be assessed and evaluated by a range of interested parties. The participants worked closely and cooperatively through a sequence of workshops to reach a better consensus on land use options. These combined the views of agricultural, commercial, conservationist, and touristic interests to establish an agreed process for collective negotiation. This made that the aspirations of local communities that live in protected areas and their surroundings was acknowledged in an innovative way by local institutions and governmental and non-governmental organizations.

Implementation of desirable futures: triggering and enabling favorable land use changes in the Rio Doce case study

The implementation of preferred and agreed land uses in Rio Doce would require a new, strategic role of regional institutions. From the ten principles of landscape approaches as defined by Sayer et al. (2013), we were able to successfully identify three principles as triggering and enabling favorable land use changes in the Rio Doce case study: (1) Mobilizing a large set of stakeholders from different sectors (private, public), (2) Those diverse groups of actors agreed on common concern entry points, and (3) together were able to foster a negotiated and transparent change logic of the trade-offs between land uses by drafting a working plan for future activities. However, those plans and tasks pointed out and agreed still need to be implemented. Therefore, although the results show that participatory processes and land use scenarios can help reconcile interests and establish a common entry point, implementing the remaining seven landscape approach principles in Rio Doce is more challenging. (1) It was very difficult to attribute rights and responsibilities across actors and institutions. (2) It was also very difficult to find institutions willing to lead the implementation of multifunctional landscapes where agriculture, conservation, and tourism are self-reinforcing. Also difficult is to (3) coordinate across multiple scales of governance. For example, while local governments were engaged in the process, funding from national agencies was cut from the Brazilian Government. (4) There was not any type of participatory and user-friendly monitoring system, nor were there (5) ways to foster resilience or (6) strengthen stakeholder capacity, and (7) empower local people. Therefore, exploring more sustainable futures across Brazilian protected areas requires a new set of institutions that work both cross-sectorial (e.g. agriculture, forestry, environment) and across different scales (National, Regional) of governance (Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2010; Cumming and Epstein 2020; Görg 2007; Leventon et al. 2019). Given the consequences on the delivery of goods and services at other scales, there have been calls for the application of multiscale approaches (Berkes and Folke 1998; Biggs et al. 2007; Carvalho-Ribeiro et al. 2016; Folhes et al. 2015; Pereira et al. 2020; Rosa et al. 2017; Zurek and Henrichs 2007, 2007). The relevant literature on this subject is scarce and exposes a number of conceptual and methodological difficulties.

Institutional arrangements and governance

Some gaps could have been filled to improve mobilization and bonds of trust, including activities suggested by the community to strengthen their bond with the research team and project. Meanwhile, in the middle of the COVID-19 pandemic, the funding for this project was suspended. The research team and the local partners (PERD) were able to continue the activities without governmental funding. Nevertheless, the challenges are strengthening of ties with the community, effective contact with the broad group of actors, envisioning the development of the Action Plan, elaboration of more detailed studies on the areas selected for implementing land agroforestry and animal husbandry land uses, etc. In order to move forward with the implementation plan established in the governance workshop, there is a need to reconcile the activities conducted by the individual sectors separately and make a landscape scenario implementation task force. The research team kept the contacts in the area and participated in the governance forums.

Another major concern is that the local leadership is fragile even though there are 32 institutions working on environmental conservation (80%). This creates a dependency of local communities towards agents that bring technical solutions to local problems but do not empower local people to gear their destinies. Rio Doce local communities and the Park administration need to lead the work plan, including other private agents such as pulp and steel industries to establish the agreed land uses and, in doing so, fulfill their corporate and social responsibility to the region.

There is not yet an actor with an educational background bridging natural and social sciences for implementing the principles of landscape approaches on the ground. If this is in place, it will likely be easier to negotiate more balanced power relationships across institutions.

Universities are being called on to participate and contribute to this process, assuming the mission of being involved with demands from the external public, encompassing civil society, private companies, and governments. An important issue is to increasingly incorporate participatory social responsibility in higher education, both in teaching, research, and extension, seeking to contribute more effectively to meeting broadly expressed social goals.

As a group of researchers, we learned that universities need the content and competencies that will foster graduate and postgraduate students with educational background and social skills on institutional analysis for bridging natural and social sciences to bring into their curriculums. A more substantial focus on social science theories will help to educate people who will afterwards integrate a new type of institution that could enable the implementation of the principles of landscape approaches on the ground. If this new set of trained professionals is in place, it will likely be easier to move towards institutions that mainstream the implementation of desirable landscape scenarios.

Although the demands for the development of collaborative and participatory research are growing, their results are not always effectively incorporated into decision-making and the formulation of public policies. The implementation crisis problem still needs to be overcome (Buchecker et al. 2021). Institutions also have to better reflect on their social roles. There is a need to go beyond the project-by-project basis for implementing preferred land use futures. That increases the divide between the project leaders and the local communities. In this context, universities can contribute by incorporating some practices in the training of professionals for this type of activity, including (i) creating innovative courses for educating a new generation of landscape stewards that are able to lead the integration of sectors such as agriculture, forestry, tourism and conservation at the landscape scale using participatory research in the economic, social and environmental areas; (ii) the involvement of landscape approach practitioners and researchers at all levels (undergraduate and graduate) in research and extension projects acknowledging that for successfully implementing landscape scenarios there is the need to foster multiscale governance; (iii) fostering the creation of junior companies bring in innovation for making sustainable land uses mainstream in remote inland areas; (iv) encouraging the publication of specific activities related to social well-being, environmental conservation and the reduction of inequalities. In this new curriculum for educating a new generation of landscape stewards, there is a need to progress with the integration of social theory (mainly focusing on fostering institutional capacity) into landscape ecology. This is the setting for this research and its contribution to participatory landscape ecology for the betterment of ecosystems and people.

Conclusion

This research focused on the processes of creating scenarios for future land use options for a buffer area around a protected park in the remnants of the Atlantic Forest in SE Brazil. Its strength lies in the methods for landscape-scale scenarios, which in turn can be assessed and evaluated by a range of interested parties that bring in the views of local communities to decision makers. Participants worked closely and cooperatively through a sequence of workshops to reach a larger consensus on land use options. These combined the views of different interests, agricultural, commercial, conservationist, and touristic, to establish an agreed process for collective negotiation. However, our results also show that there is not yet a new set of landscape stewards to lead. Additionally, we call for more responsive institutions and governance as well as the changing role of university-based research for working towards sustainable landscape outcomes. We also emphasize the challenge of overcoming the discrepancy between the poor institutional infrastructure of regions and their key role in leading a sustainable transition. Therefore, the implementation of more sustainable land uses calls for the installation of new forms of regional strategic planning with regional actor platforms.