AGROVOC

as Knowledge Organization Model

Applied to Brazilian Agricultural Intensification Processes

Ivo Pierozzi Jr.

Leandro Henrique M. OliveiraGladis Maria de B. Almeida

Caterina Caracciolo

Gudrun Johannsen

Embrapa: Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation

» Embrapa supports Brazilian agribusiness through knowledge and technology generation

and trasfer

» It regularly deals with multidimensional issues, involving agriculture, environment, society

and politicy:

» Embrapa addresses these problems with multi / trans disciplinary approaches

» Proposed solutions (technologies, products and services) are then developed into

projects involving wide RD&I networks;

» RD&I networks face problems hampering creation and sharing of knowledge, due to:

» geographic dispersion of people in a large country;

» information production and distribution in multi media formats;

» knowledge nature (different specialties; languages and even schools of thought);

» Embrapa see KOS as possible support to RD&I networks to facilitate the construction,

application, dissemination and appropriation of scientific discourse.

Goal

» Build a model of information and knowledge organization for the domain of agricultural

intensification in Brazil. Specifically in the regions of production of soybean and

sugar cane.

What is agricultural intensification (AI)?

» First conceptualization dates back to 1965, by Boserup:

“any practice that increases agricultural production in given (same) area unit

at some cost in labor or capital inputs”

» BOSERUP, E. The Conditions of Agricultural Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change under Population

Pressure. London, G. Allen and Unwin, 1965; Chicago: Aldine, 1965. 124 pp.

» AI may represent a reduction of fallow period and consequent multi harvests; intensified

use of machinery, chemical pesticides, irrigation, fertilization; use of draft animals;

genetically modified plant or animal varieties and so on.

» After Boserup, the term has been used to mean “agricultural expansion”, “intensive

agriculture”, “modernization”; “technification”.

» Different views have developed, sometimes conflicting often confusing

» Need to make explicit the various dimensions involved in AI and conciliate the complexity

involved by an intrinsic interdisciplinary notion.

Boserup’s agricultural intensification as a graphic

(Thesis: Population determines agricultural methods)

Use case: AI of soybean and sugar cane in Brazil

Intensification is already in ?place

(A) Production density of soybean in 2000 and 2007 - Mato Grosso

(B) Production density of sugar cane in 2000 and 2007 - Sao Paulo

(C) Legend (D) Areas of production in a map of Brazil

(A)

(B) (C)

(D)

Use case: AI of soybean and sugar cane in Brazil

Empirical observations suggested that intensification was going

on in the regions of Mato Grosso and Sao Paulo

Intagro project was meant to verify this hypothesis

A KOS was built to support the organization of data and

material from the project

Underlying idea was that a KOS could promote better

understanding of the process that was occurring in the region

We used AGROVOC as a starting point

Methodology for the construction of a KOS for

agriculture intensification

Results

A categorization system with 600 concepts (“entries”) in EN and PT/BR

Around 50% of terms were not present in AGROVOC

Sometimes neither in English nor in Portuguese

In other cases, only English was present

The PT form available was judged according to use in Portugal or Brazil

Hierarchy distinguishes 4 main conceptual levels:

“environment”,

“agronomy”

“territoriality”

“socioeconomy”

Also, subhierarchiese for 3 complementary points of view on AI:

“methodologies”

“geographic locations”

“institutions”

KOS is not published yet, but available as graph visualization

http://cnptia.embrapa.br/~leandro/intagro/

A fragment of the resulting KOS and comparison with

AGROVOC content

1PT/BR form not yet present in

AGROVOC;

2Alternative ways to PT/BR term

translation;

o, +, #, * represent different

hierarchical levels in the

categorization system.

Idiomatic variations between PT/PT and PT/BR

PT/PT: Portuguese from Portugal; PT/BR: Portuguese from Brazil; *: term not registered in AGROVOC.

Conclusions and future work

The KOS for AI proved to be useful, because we used it to

organize the disciplines needed to understand AI:

agroenvironment and socieconomy

The project will continue by taking into considerations them one

more closely.

Given the lack of material in protuguese, AGROVOC was a helpful

resource , both from a terminological and organizational point of

view

We provided feedback to AGROVOC concerning the

specificity of Brazialian language (compared to Protuguese)

We suggest that more work is needed for expanding

AGROVOC to better cover the concepts and terminologies

used in Brazil, incluiding regional variations of PT/BR

Muito obrigado! Grazie molte! Dank!

Ivo Pierozzi Jr. ivo@cnptia.embrapa.br

Leandro Henrique Mendonça de Oliveira leandro@cnptia.embrapa.br

Embrapa Informática Agropecuária, Campinas, SP, Brazil

Gladis Maria de Barcellos Almeida gladis.mba@gmail.com

Universidade Federal de São Carlos, São Carlos, SP, Brazil

Caterina Caracciolo caterina.caracciolo@fao.org

Gudrun Johannsen gudrun.johannsen@fao.org

Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations, Rome, Italy