




































In ternationa l
Scholars
Journa ls

 

African Journal of Agricultural Marketing ISSN 2375-1061 Vol. 5 (12), pp. 001-006, December, 2017. Available online 
at www.internationalscholarsjournals.org © International Scholars Journals 

 

Author(s)                                           Author(s) retain the copyright of this article. 
 
 

 

Full Length Research Paper 

 

Influence of modern technology on small family-
owned farms in the Brazilian savannah region: A case 

study of a settlement in Mato Grosso do Sul State 

 
Arcelei Lopes Bambil and Olivier Vilpoux* 

 
Catholic University of Campo Grande (UCDB), Mato Grosso do Sul – Brasil. 

 
Accepted 20 August, 2017 

 
The Savannah region is the second biggest biome in Brazil after the amazon forest. Today, the savannah is 
Brazil´s largest region responsible for commodity production. Nevertheless, this production is concentrated 
around large-scale farmers. Most of the small farmers representing the largest group of producers encounter 
many problems ranging from low levels of production to income difficulties. The objective of the research was 
to verify the influence of technology in problems encountered by small farmers installed in the Savannah 
region. The research has been realized with a case study in a cooperative from the settlement São Manoel, in 
the Mato Grosso do Sul State, Centre of Brazil. Praxeology, knowledge of how to use technology, has been 
identified as the most important characteristic to explain the cooperative problems. For annual crops, in fertile 
soils, technologies can be traditional and therefore the use of modern praxeology is not necessary. In poor 
soils, typical of the Brazilian savannah, the necessity of modern technology requires the domination of more 
complex praxeologies. Perennial crops and investments in special structures, such as green houses also 
require modern technologies and adequate praxeologies, which were not available in the cooperative. The 
results indicate the importance of extension services and training methods adapted to the technologies used. 
Otherwise, the small producers of the Brazilian savannah are limited to traditional technologies, useful only 
for crops with good climate and fertile soil, which represent a small part of the biome, mainly near rivers. 

 

Key words: Technology, familiar agriculture, savannah. 
 
 
INTRODUCTION 

 
The Savannah occupies an area of approximately 2 
million km² and is the second largest biome in Brazil 
(Ribeiro and Walter, 1998). Small parts of the savannah 
are also found in the Amazon, Caatinga, the dry region of 
northeastern Brazil, and the Atlantic Forest, which 
occupies much of the coastal region of the country 
(Aguiar et al., 2004). The Savannah has provided 
conditions favorable to human settlement since ancient 
times. According to Barbosa and Schmitz (1998), the 
remains found in archeological sites, such as those 
located in the municipality of Serranópolis, state of Goiás 
in central Brazil, indicate that the occupation of the biome  
 
 
 
*Corresponding author. E-mail: vilpoux@ucdb.br. 

 
 
 
 

 
began some 11 thousand years ago. The first inhabitants 
were hunters and collectors of fruit, eggs, shellfish and 
other products of the rich biodiversity, which began to be 
strongly affected by the arrival of colonizers of European 
origin. Of these, the most famous characters are the 
Bandeirantes who penetrate into the hinterland in search 
of precious minerals and Indians for slavery. Extensive 
livestock has continued that process of occupation, 
prevailing as the main economic activity until the advent 
of modernization, with the introduction of new 
technologies in agriculture in the decades of 1960/70 
(Shiki, 2000).  

According to Bourlegat (2003), modernization of 
agriculture in the Brazilian Savannah is an exogenous 
process which did not arise from self-evolution of pre-
existing models. The introduction of a new pattern of 

file:///C:\Users\user\Documents\REPUBLICATION\AGRICULTURAL%20SCIENCES\AppData\Local\Temp\www.internationalscholarsjournals.org


 
 
 

 

production is a consequence of external entities, and the 
Federal Government has been a dynamic element of this 
process. In the context of public policy, the Federal 
Government initiative led to the creation of EMBRAPA - 
Brazilian agricultural Research Agency, and the Brazilian 
Technical Assistance Agency - EMBRATER and 
incentive programs to the territorial occupation of the 
Savannah by agribusiness capital. As mentioned by Silva 
(2000), citing Shiki (1997) and Salim (1998), the 
Development Program of the Brazilian Savannah 
(Polocentro), created in 1975, was the most emblematic 
and comprehensive Federal Government program to 
transform the Savannah as a major producer of 
commodities. The resources of Polocentro intended to 
research and provide technical assistance to rural credit, 
to mechanization and soil correction and other benefits. 
The credit had a low interest rate, no monetary correction 
and long grace periods. The biggest beneficiaries were 
the large landowners, contributing to the exclusion of a 
significant portion of the rural population who suffered an 
intense process of deterritorialization (Bourlegat, 2003). 
The rural settlements deployed from the 1980s are a 
result of this process, which can be interpreted as a form 
of reterritorialization.  

Referring to environmental issues, the modernization of 
the savannah brought serious problems for biodiversity, 
soil and water resources. After analyzing the process of 
deforestation and fragmentation of vegetation which 
occurred in the decades of 1970/80, Bourlegat (2003) 
notes that environmental problems began with the 
selective extraction of timber and continued with the 
felling and windrowing. In the first operation, the 
vegetation was removed using a chain or a bulldozer 
blade. During a second time operation, the plant remains 
were pushed into a windrow and later burned, leaving the 
ground without its thin layer of organic matter, as quoted 
by Coutinho (2000). These new techniques resulted in 
large-scale deforestation, soil depletion, which favored 
the emergence of new pests and, most likely, potentiated 
the effects of existing ones due to the reduction of natural 
enemies and the introduction of exotic species 
(Bourlegat, 2003). This set of unfavorable factors in 
agriculture has created a social and environmental 
impasse which has limited the development of 
settlements in the Brazilian savannah. 
 

 

Objective of the study 

 

The research aimed to investigate the influence of 
technology on the results achieved by small family-owned 
farms implanted in the Brazilian savannah. To this end 
we used the case study. 
 

 
METHODOLOGY 
 
For Grawitz (2001), this  type of  research  is  characterized  by the 

 
 

  
 
 

 
collection of the maximum amount of information about a particular 
and limited subject. The case study allows the development of 
hypotheses about an issue without providing scientific evidence, 
which should be raised later in a more experimental type of 
research. The case chosen was from settlers, group of small 
producers which represents a large proportion of family farming in 
the savannah region. The producers came from the settlement São 
Manoel, in the Municipality of Anastácio, in the Brazilian State of 
Mato Grosso do Sul. All had been members of a producers' 
cooperative, the Cooperative of Agricultural Production Canudos - 
COPAC, which made several attempts to organize the production 
of the settlement, using different types of technology and diversified 
crops. The organization of small producers into a cooperative, 
which is rare not only in the Midwest of Brazil, but in many parts of 
the world, as reported by FAO (2009 a, b), conducting experiments 
with different technologies, from the most traditional to the most 
modern, with cultivation of different crops, from annual to perennial, 
can explain the selection of this case.  

The Hacienda San Manoel, City of Anastácio, was occupied by 
landless peasants in October 1989. While waiting for the 
expropriation of the area, the occupants had installed a camp on 
the banks of the Criminoso River, where they established small 
community plantations for subsistence in the fertile soil near the 
river. Each plantation was under the responsibility of a group 
consisting of four to five families. Among these groups of families, 
two are worthy of mention, the group named Padroeira and the one 
called Bonito. Later, they joined and formed the group that gave 
rise to the Cooperative of Agricultural Production Canudos – 
COPAC, founded in October 1993. Data was obtained through 
structured interviews with all remaining members of the 
Cooperative, with a total of ten families. The research also included 
an analysis of documents on the Cooperative available in the State 
Extension Entity (AGRAER) and the Bank of Brazil, a public bank 
and main financier of small family-owned farms in Brazil. Visits to 
settlements allow the realization of direct observations on site, with 
evaluation of the production processes adopted and the equipment 
available. 
 

 
Importance of technology in the development of the Brazilian 
Savannah 

 
The quasi-stagnation and difficulty in responding to social demands 
in most of the settlements located in the Savannah of the Brazilian 
State of Mato Grosso do Sul can be considered a paradox in front 
of the technological standard of modern agriculture, which reaches 
high productivity and is located in the same area. After two decades 
of the early establishment of settlements in the state, most of them 
are weakened economically and socially and are environmentally 
devastated as well. Without minimizing the positive aspects of 
Brazilian agrarian reform, the fact is that in the State of Mato 
Grosso do Sul the economic and environmental dimensions 
contradict the expectations created around it. In the period prior to 
the modernization of agriculture in the Savannah, most of it was 
occupied by extensive breeding of cattle and the extraction of 
species of economic interest. Agriculture was practiced mainly in 
the most fertile soils, near the rivers. There are strong indications 
that the technology that allowed the Savannah to become viable for 
agriculture does not fit the model of small family-owned farms. This 
technological matrix, or modern technology for large scale 
production, was available for land reform, which may have 
contributed to the unsustainability and stagnation verified in most of 
the reformed, or settled areas. The experience of the case study 
examined in this research is emblematic in this regard. Despite 
having the basic productive resources - land, organization, credit, 
technology and technical assistance - the experience was not 
successful. 



 
 
 

 
According to Santos (1997), farmers who migrated to the Midwest 
during the modernization of agriculture, mainly from the South, felt 
displaced in front of an environmental reality different from that in 
which they lived and grew. They were unaware of the potential of 
the natural environment such as fruits, medicinal plants, animals, 
soil characteristics and climate. This statement is consistent with 
the proposition of the survey, with one exception: it was not only 
immigrants who felt displaced. Traditional farmers from the 
savannah region also had the same experience, due to the change 
of the natural environment of agricultural production. During this 
period, with the adoption of modern technology such as chemical 
fertilization, occurred a displacement of cultures from the fertile 
soils, in the banks of the rivers, located in more sloping area, to the 
savannah part, with large and flat areas, where the use of 
mechanization is easier. The technology is developed according to 
the socio-environmental context. As a result, according to Jequier 
(1979), technologies developed in the core countries can be 
effective, but when released in the peripheral countries often cause 
more problems than solutions. The management of machines and 
equipment produced in other realities can be simple, which does 
not mean technological mastery over them in regards to the 
economic, cultural, environmental and other kinds of differences.  

The so-called appropriate technology is presented as a way to 
overcome the productive deficiencies, without resorting to 
exogenous technologies. It is often treated as low-cost, 
intermediate or traditional technology. "The appropriate technology 
should be, first and foremost, an indigenous creation in developing 
countries, and the main problem encountered is to form an 
indigenous capacity to innovate and not to import more technology 
..." (Jequier, 1979). 

 

Concepts of technology adopted in the research 
 
According to Jequier (1979), technology does not refer only to 
physical components, such as factories, machines, products or 
works of infrastructure (roads, warehouses, dams, etc.). These 
technology components are only the visible aspects of the 
technology which goes further and includes the logical, or 
intangibles, components such as information, knowledge, technical 
skill, education, administration as well as other institutional 
arrangements. For Vargas (1994), apud Vitorette (2001), 
technology is defined as the symbiosis of technique with modern 
science and is therefore a set of human activities. These activities 
are associated with symbols, instruments and machines aimed at 
the construction of works and manufacturing of products, according 
to the theories, methods and processes of modern science. Based 
on the concepts of productive forces and production relations, 
Gama (1987) identifies four components that constitute modern 
technology: "Technology of Work, Materials Technology, 
Technology of Work Tools, Basic Technology or Praxeology”.  

The Technology of Work refers to the administration of working 
times, the division of labor, relations between workers, safety and 
occupational medicine (GAMA, 1987). The author cites the example 
of ergonomics (for the design of equipment compatible with comfort 
and efficiency) and the Rational Organization of Work (the study of 
time, fatigue, environmental conditions of work, standardization of 
methods and machinery). The Materials Technology treats the 
object of work, which is “[...] upon which carries the action of man. 
[...]. The object of a work stage may be the product of a previous 
phase: a log of wood is a product of the work of timber, but is the 
subject of work at the sawmill which provides [...] carpenters and 
joiners with beams” (GAMA, 1987). This component of modern 
technology studies the materials, whether natural or synthetic, 
which will be transformed into products. Always, according to Gama 
(1987), the Technology of Work Tools refers to tools, implements 
and machines used. It also includes energy use in its various forms. 
Basic technology, or Praxeology, is knowledge. According to Gama 

 
 
 
 

 
(1987), the praxeology is “[...] the study of methods to arrive at 
operational conclusions. It is the logic of rational activity driven by 
action”. Negrão (2000) states that the praxeology “refers to the 
disciplines and techniques that support the other areas of 
technology, which may include among them some applied 
sciences. [...] It is the study of all aspects that affect the action, that 
is questions of methods, standards, representation, measurement, 
repertoire and vocabulary, etc., in order to make effective action”.  

In the case study of COPAC, some modern technology 
components that characterize the modernization of Brazilian 
agriculture were considered from the decades of 1960/70 such as: 
the use of credit, machinery, motor sprayer, chemical inputs, 
mechanized deforestation, trash blanketing and use of improved 
seeds. Also considered as modern was the practice of 
administrative planning, the use of tax accounting and methods and 
techniques that are not part of the peasant tradition, such as 
investments in infrastructure (greenhouses, dams). Technology 
composed by productive tools and procedures that are part of 
peasant culture since before the modernization of Brazilian 
agriculture, even if they are industrial products, has been 
considered as traditional technology. This category shall cover hoe, 
ax, plow, animal traction, rake, manual sprayer, insecticide use, 
tree felling, manual harvesting, the use of a community task force 
between farmers and the practice of a simple accounting or notes. 
In the cases where there was no clear predominance of one type of 
technology over the other, indicating balance between the use of 
traditional and modern technologies, the technology used was 
considered as mixed. 
 

 

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 

 

In its creation in 1993, the Cooperative was composed of 
24 persons belonging to 14 families with a total area of 
334.48 ha in the settlement São Manoel. In the area there 
were 44 ha of crops like corn, rice, cassava, banana, 
cotton, vegetables, and 10 ha of pasture in addition to 
large areas of savannah. This area consisted of the entire 
capital of the cooperative members. The production was 
organized into five productive sectors: 1) vegetable 
garden, 2) machinery, 3) livestock, 4) beekeeping and 5) 
farming. In the months following the beginning of 
activities, the number of cooperative members had 
reached 30 people, but the participation declined, to be 
reduced to 10 families in the first years of operation. 
According to Jequier (1979), one of the difficulties faced 
by cooperatives in many developing countries is the 
requirement of a high degree of technical skill needed to 
manage the organization. It is essential for people 
responsible for the administration to have deep 
experience and motivation. For this purpose, some 
members of COPAC were sent to the states of Parana 
and Santa Catarina, States in the South of Brazil where 
cooperatives of small farmers are very strong, to attend 
technical courses in cooperative development and 
accounting.  

With the legalization of the cooperative, the cooperative 
members had access to the Special Credit Program for 
Agrarian Reform - PROCERA. The amount of resources 
devoted to COPAC, released by the Bank of Brazil, was 
R$ 41,490.00. This loan was used to purchase dairy 
breed cattle, wire, a chain saw, deforestation and tillage. 



  
 
 

 
Table 1. Results obtained from annual crops, which do not require an investment in infrastructure, according to the technologies adopted.  
 
  

Working 
Predominant 

Predominant More complex 
 

 

 Crops technology of Final results  

 material technology of work praxeology  

  work tools  
 

      
 

 Community crop Fertile soil Traditional Traditional Absente Good productivity 
 

 Cotton plantation Poor soil Mix Mix Absente Low productivity 
 

 Slash-and-burn cotton plantation Fertile soil Traditional Mix Absente Good productivity 
 

 Cotton plantation Poor soil Modern Modern Precarious Low productivity 
 

 Cotton plantation Poor soil Modern Modern Absente Loss of plantation 
 

 
 

 

In the same period, two additional credits were also 
released, totaling R$ 19,037.00, for the drilling of a semi-
artesian well. Thus, COPAC has contracted a total 
investment credit equal to R$ 60,527.75 (equivalent to R$ 
100,000 in 2011 values, or around US$ 55,000.00). 
Beyond the resources described, each of the ten families 
had the right to an individual credit of R$ 3,192.00, 
totaling R$ 31,920.00. These financial resources were 
used to buy a medium sized tractor and implements, and 
fund the construction of dams, a reservoir, expansion of 
deforestation, acquisition of lime and phosphorus 
fertilizers, as well as to purchase cotton and corn seeds 
and poisons for the 1994/95 harvest. Table 1 shows the 
results achieved from annual crops, depending on the 
adopted technologies.  

While still at the stage of community crop, with 
predominance of traditional technology such as that used 
in the exploitation of the lowlands, the most fertile soils of 
Brazilian savannah, or with the “slash-and-burn 
technology”, without mechanical removal of organic 
matter, farmers have been successful in production. With 
regard to cotton fields, the difference is flagrante between 
the results achieved between areas deforested with a 
bulldozer blade and those deforested with “slash-and-
burn technology”, utilizing manual labor. The result of the 
latter exceeded the regional average of productivity, while 
the other areas have comparatively low yields, including 
fields where soil analysis, correction and fertilization have 
been conducted. The information collected in the survey 
indicates that farmers who were members of COPAC 
produced satisfactorily with small surfaces where the soil 
is more fertile, in an area which represents less than 20% 
of the total area belonging to the Cooperative. This area 
was used for subsistence crops, repeating the peasant 
tradition of exploiting these kind of land existing in the 
Savannah mainly for consumption and sale of any 
surplus in local trade. On the other hand, the farming 
introduced by COPAC in other parts of the Savannah, 
with poor soil was traditionally reserved for livestock but 
today it is used for large modern soybeans, cotton and 
corn plantations, were barely able to produce to pay for 
inputs, except for cases in which a low of technology has 
been used, such as “slash-and-burn”. In these cases, the 
mechanization process responsible for the removal of the 
topsoil, where the organic matter is located, is not 

 
 

 
realized, maintaining natural soil fertility for a longer 
period.  

Table 1 indicates some factors that may have had great 
importance for the production performance for the 
COPAC cooperative. In the case of the most fertile land, 
the adopted work and work tools technologies were more 
traditional. It can be considered that for cultivation in high 
fertility soils, the traditional method is sufficient and there 
is no need for more complex praxeology in order to obtain 
good productivity. In the lands of lower fertility, traditional 
technologies are inadequate, making necessary the use 
of more modern technologies. In this case, the control of 
more complex praxeology becomes a necessity, which 
was not observed with the members of COPAC, as 
indicated in Table 1. In this case, low productivity is 
primarily due to a lack of suitable praxeology, not allowing 
for the proper use of work and work tools technologies. 
Table 2 presents the results for perennial crops and other 
specific enterprises, requiring additional investments, 
such as greenhouses and a dam. The construction of the 
dam is a case that attracted attention because it is not an 
activity typically peasant. As it has been planned and 
executed by inexperienced people, without technical 
expertise, it can be assumed that there was malpractice 
during the construction. We can cite the absence of 
studies of the micro water basin upstream from the work 
being done, of the characteristics of the damming and of 
the construction planning. These aspects are part of the 
technology (praxeology) required for the construction of a 
dam technology, that members of COPAC did not 
dominate, even if a small one. 
 

The search for alternatives to traditional crops, driven 
by the need to produce for market commercialization, led 
COPAC to opt for enterprises which required greater 
investments, with necessities of modern works and work 
tools technologies. These agricultural enterprises relied 
on poor professional technical assistance and suffered 
from technological setbacks, some of which should have 
been predictable and manageable with existing 
technology. In the case of greenhouses, the building 
model was imported from Rio Grande do Sul, a Southern 
Brazilian State. In this region, climate is very different, 
and the building project did not make any adaptation for 
the Mato Grosso do Sul region, mainly concerning the 
occurrence of strong winds. The sensitivity of plastic 



 
 
 

 
Table 2. Results achieved in perennial crops and enterprises that need investment in infrastructure, according to the technologies adopted.  
 
   Predominant Predominant   

 

 Enterprise Working material technology of technology of Praxeology Final results 
 

   work tools work   
 

 Dam construction Land, water (heavy Modern Modern Precarious Destroyed by flood 
 

  rain)     
 

 Greenhouses Local, weather (strong Modern Modern Precarious Destruction of 
 

 construction wind)    greenhouses by wind 
 

 1
.st

 harvest of Greenhouse, good Modern Modern Precarious Good production 
 

 tomatoes climate     
 

      
 

 2
.nd

 harvest of Greenhouse, warm Modern Modern Precarious Low production 
 

 tomatoes climate, pests     
 

      
 

 1
.st

 harvest of Fertile soil, good Modern Modern Precarious Good production 
 

 passion fruits climate     
 

      
 

 2
nd

 harvest of Fertile soil, pests Modern Modern Precarious Low production 
 

 passion fruits      
 

 Banana crop Fertile soil, Modern Modern Precarious Plantation lost 
 

  contaminated plants     
 

 
 

 

greenhouses to climate variables is well known, and 
climate conditions should have been analyzed very 
carefully. The first tomato crop benefited from a favorable 
climate, allowing for good production. In the second crop, 
held in the summer, excess temperatures inside the 
greenhouses damaged the crop. Besides this problem, 
the lack of proper care during the first crop has facilitated 
the development of pests, particularly of the whitefly. The 
period of the attack of the whitefly coincides with the entry 
of this pest in the Mato Grosso do Sul State. In this 
period, the pest was new in the region and there were not 
many technological control resources. Its occurrence was 
considered as a major problem for local agriculture.  

The first crop of passion fruit provided a good yield for 
the Cooperative. The second year, however, saw the 
appearance of pests and diseases in this crop, due to 
lack of proper care in the first year. Despite awareness to 
the fact that the banana chosen by COPAC producers, 
the banana-maçã, is susceptible to Panama disease, 
which was already present in the region, the prevention 
measure was limited to disinfecting of the plants with 
bleach, which proved to be insufficient to prevent 
contamination by the fungus. The choice of pest-resistant 
varieties with good market acceptance would have been 
more appropriate. The results of Table 2 identify the need 
for the use of technologies qualified as modern, in works 
and tools of work. However, the proper use of these 
technologies requires adequate praxeology. In the event 

 
 

 

of severe weather (heat, excessive rain, strong winds), or 
the appearance of pests, the results of the projects have 
always been negative. In this case, as for Table 1, the 
lack of praxeology was of great importance. The adoption 
of modern technologies of works and work tools does not 
respond positively, if the use of these technologies is not 
combined with appropriate praxeology. 
 
 

 

Conclusion 

 

COPAC technological setbacks did not happen due to 
differences between the environmental conditions, before 
and after the settlement. Although most farmers had 
been born in other regions of the state and country, 
outside of the Savannah, at the time of deployment of the 
settlement all Cooperative members were already 
adapted to this biome. The data indicates that farmers 
did not stop to produce, according to tradition, in favor of 
modern technologies. They instead tried to associate 
both technologies. Initially, at the phase of collective and 
community crops, there was a predominance of 
traditional technology. Little by little, as the farmers tried 
to commercialize more and more of their production, 
greater weight was given to modern technologies, which 
occurred mainly from the release of credit. This did not 
imply the abandonment of traditional technological 



 
 
 

 

resources nor the increase of productivity. What really 
happened was a failure to comply with the requirements 
for the application of modern technology, causing 
successive negative economic impacts which exhausted 
the resources and discouraged the producers.  

The praxeology proved to be the most important point 
to explain the problems encountered by the Cooperative. 
In annual crops, soil quality was a major factor. In fertile 
soils, the use of more modern praxeology is not 
necessary, as the work and work tools technologies may 
be traditional. In poorer soils, typical of the savannah, the 
use of modern technologies is essential, making 
necessary the domination of appropriate praxeology, 
which was not dominated by the members of the 
Cooperative. Perennial crops and investments in a more 
complex infrastructure, like greenhouses, also need 
modern technology and appropriate praxeology; 
praxeology not dominated by farmers in the cooperative, 
despite participating several training sessions. In this 
case, the first year of crops, characterized by adequate 
working material, gives good results. However, the lack of 
appropriate practices to maintain the working material of 
the following years, favored the appearance of pests and 
diseases, affecting incomes. As in the case of annual 
crops on poor soils, modern technology is indispensable 
for production with unfavorable working materials, but a 
praxeology able to dominate the technological needs is 
also required.  

This conclusion does not mean that availability of 
modern technology with appropriate praxeology would 
necessarily lead to the sustainability of the productive 
system. It is important to pay attention to the fact that 
small family-owned farms are subject to the market laws, 
including consumer demand, competition, capital 
intensive use and the need for technological innovation. 
The use of appropriate technologies with the necessary 
praxeology is useless without the existence of a market 
demand. The producers of COPAC participated in several 
training sessions for management and production 
technology (labor), but these sessions were not enough 
to meet the requirements of material production (climate, 
soil, crops), works and work tools technologies. In this 
case, the adopted praxeology can be characterized as 
inadequate to the socio-environment and therefore did 
not lead to the expected results. The results of the 
research indicate the importance of rural extension and 
training adapted to the used technologies. Without 
adequate knowledge, small producers of the savannah 
are limited to the use of traditional technologies, suited 
only for annual crops, favorable climate, fertile soil and 
the lack of pests and diseases.  

Even if research on other settlements and cooperatives 
of small farmers is required to extend the results obtained 
in this study, as outlined in earlier in the description of the 
goals of the case study, it is possible to estimate that the 
praxeology limitations can be a barrier to the 
development of the small family-owned farming in the 

 
 

  
 
 

 

Brazilian savannah region. This result could partially 
explain the difficulties encountered in numerous 
settlements in the region, where the soil is not very fertile 
and the level of producers praxeology is inadequate. 
 

 
REFERENCES 
 
Aguiar LM de S, Marinho FJ, Machado RB (2004). Diversidade 

biológica do Cerrado. In: Aguiar LM de S, Camargo AJA de. Cerrado: 
ecologia e caracterização. Planaltina, DF: Embrapa Cerrados, p. 
249.  

Barbosa AS, Schimiz PI (1998). Ocupação indígena do Cerrado. IN: 
Almeida SP, Sano SM. Cerrado: ambiente e flora. Planaltina, DF: 
Embrapa – CPAC, p. 556.  

Coutinho LM (2000). Aspectos do Cerrado. Available in: <ww 
http://eco.ib.usp.br/cerrado/aspectos_bioma.htm o>. Access 
in: March 2011.  

FAO (2009a). The State of Agricultural Commodity Markets 2009: High 
food prices and the food crisis – experiences and lessons learned. 
FAO, Roma: pp. 68. Available in:  
<http://www.fao.org/docrep/012/i0854e/i0854e00.htm>. Access in: 
January 2010. 

FAO (2009b). The state of food and agriculture: Livestock in the  
balance. FAO, Roma: pp. 180. Available in: 
<http://www.fao.org/publications/sofa/en/>. Access in: January 2010. 

Gama R  (1987). A  tecnologia e o trabalho na história.  São Paulo:  
Nobel, p. 213.  

Grawitz M (2001). Méthodes des sciences sociales, 11° ed. Paris, 
Dalloz, p. 1019.  

Jéquier  N  (1976).  Tecnologia  apropriada:  problemas y  promessas. 
Paris: Organización de Coperación y Desarrollo Económicos, p. 100.  

LeBourlegat CA (2003). A fragmentação da vegetação natural e o 
paradigma do desenvolvimento rural. In: Costa RB. Fragmentação 
Florestal e alternativas de desenvolvimento rural na região Centro-
Oeste. Campo Grande: UCDB, p. 246.  

Negrão JFRK (2000). A quem serve o servidor? O ensino da língua 
inglesa na formação para o trabalho e a tecnologia. Master of 
Science in Technology Teses. Centro Federal de Educação 
Tecnológica do Paraná, Curitiba, p. 95.  

Ribeiro JF, Walter BMT (1998). Fitofisionomias do bioma Cerrado. In: 
Almeida SP, Sano SM. Cerrado: ambiente e flora. Planaltina, DF: 
Embrapa – CPAC, p. 556.  

Santos JVT dos (2004). Efeitos sociais da modernização da agricultura. 
In: Curso de pós-graduação latu sensu em desenvolvimento, 
agricultura e sociedade para técnicos do IDATERRA/MS. Agricultura 
familiar e sustentabilidade (Parte II). Campo Grande, pp. 92-98.  

Shiki S (2000). Globalização do domínio dos cerrados: sustentabilidade 
do sistema agroalimentar sob regulação privada. Projeto Brasil 
Sustentável e Democrático. In: Shiki S. O futuro do cerrado: 
degradação versus sustentabilidade e controle social. Rio de 
Janeiro. FASE, Série Cadernos Temáticos, número 2.  

Silva LL (2000). O papel do estado no processo de ocupação das áreas 
de Cerrado entre as décadas de 60 e 80. Caminhos de Geografia, 
1(2): 24-36.  

Vitorette JMB (2001). Implantação dos cursos superiores de tecnologia 
no CEFET-PR. Centro Federal de Educação Tecnológica do Paraná, 
Curitiba, p. 133. 

Yin RK (2005). Estudo de caso: planejamento e método. 3.ed. Porto  
Alegre: Bookman, p. 212. 


