Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture ORIGINAL ARTICLE MOREIRA, Samya de Freitas [1], SANTOS, Sara Dorea de Oliveira [2], SILVA, Raiane Ferreira [3], LOBO, Ronilson Rosário [4], JESUS, Edmir dos Santos [5], JÚNIOR, Antônio Pereira [6] MOREIRA, Samya de Freitas. Et al. Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture. Revista Científica Multidisciplinar Núcleo do Conhecimento. 04 year, Ed. 12, Vol. 03, pp. 91-113. December 2019. ISSN: 2448-0959 Contents SUMMARY 1. INTRODUCTION 2. LITERATURE REVIEW 3. METHODOLOGY 3.1 METHOD 3.2 AREA OF STUDY 4. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 4.1 AS FAR AS SOYBEAN PRODUCTION 4.2 AS FAR AS THE UNFORWEED AREA 4.3 AS FOR POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EXTERNALITIES IN THE MUNICIPALITY OF PARAGOMINAS – PA 4.3.1 GDP GROWTH PER CAPITA 4.3.2 EVOLUTION OF SCHOOL ENROLMENTs, NUMBER OF SCHOOLS AND TEACHERS HIRED 4.3.3 CORRELATION BETWEEN SOYBEAN PLANTED AREA AND UNFORWEED AREA 4.3.4 CORRELATION BETWEEN DEFORESTATION AND TOTAL RAINFALL 5. CONCLUSION REFERENCES SUMMARY Externalities have positive or negative effects because they generate costs or benefits for society. The aim of this study was to conduct a quantitative-qualitative research, for evidence in relation to externalities and the advancement of sojiculture, in the municipality of www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture Paragominas, and, with this, generate data that allow an adequate balance. The method applied was the inductive, with quantitative qualitative approach, associated with the survey of documentary data with time frame between 2008 and 2016, due to the implementation of the Green Municipality Project in 2008. The analysis of the obtained data indicated that there was an evolution in the soybean planted area (52,520 ha to 239,163 ha) in the three three- year periods analyzed (2008-2010; 2011-2013; 2014-2016), also indicated that there was an advance in agricultural GDP (R$ 101,605,000.00 to R$ 278,493,000.00), and consequently, an increase in municipal GDP (R$ 4,290,238,000.00 to R$ 6,684,730,690.00), qualified as positive externalities. However, it resulted in negative externalities, such as deforestation, which increased from 2,555,710 ha in (2008-2010) to 2,619,570 ha in (2014-2016). Therefore, this situation of negative externalities can be circumvented with the application of sustainable techniques (e.g., no-tillage technique; inoculation of seeds for Biological Nitrogen Fixation (BNF) in the soil, as well as the use of areas of deforested. Keywords: Deforestation, no-tillage, income, agricultural sector, soybeans. 1. INTRODUCTION Externality is a market failure, and can be understood as a cost or benefit, resulting from the production of an economic good, or from the consumption of goods and services, which focuses on third parties, with the exception of producers. It originates, in this case, from production or consumption, and can be positive, when it generates a benefit, and negative, when it entails a cost (ALMEIDA, 2013; ANTUNES, 2009; MIRANDA, 2014). Soybean monoculture, for example, lacks further analysis, as it is a potentially producing activity of positive and negative externalities (BALBINOT JUNIOR et al., 2017). The Brazilian evolutionary process of sojiculture began in 1941, when this culture acquired the first national reference of commercial production in Brazil, with the cultivation of 450 tons. Eight years later, Brazil raised production to 5,651.33%, with 25,881 tons in 1949, when it acquired its first international record as a producer. Ten years later, soybean swell swelled from 151,574 tons, and in the following decade, to 1,056,607 tons, an increase of 597.09%. From this, soybeans have definitely established itself as an economically important crop for the country (EMBRAPA, 2015). www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture However, in 1970, less than 2% of national production was harvested in central Brazil. However, in 1980, this percentage increased to 20%, in 1990 it was already more than 40% and, in 2011, the contribution was 60%, and with tendencies to occupy more space with each new crop. As a reflection of this productivity advance in the country, Brazil ranks second to largest producer of oilseeds, with little difference in production, and with this happens only the United States (DALL’AGNOL, 2011). In other words, soybean cultivation is the exponent of Brazilian agribusiness, and the continuous expansion begins to draw attention to the effects that derive from this production. The externalities generated by soybean monoculture are not limited to those directly related to the areas destined to such crop (FIRMINO; FONSECA, 2008). Moreover, when considering that there are by-products (goods of public interest generated by agricultural activity), resulting from agricultural activity, with special attention to soybean monoculture, these by-products should be understood as externalities. It is essential to arrive at a model of remuneration of externalities, either by subsidies from the government, or by the increase in the prices of such articles (GRANZIERA; SAES, 2014). In relation to positive externalities, sojicultura stands out for its political weight, therefore, it promotes the implementation of infrastructure works in the region from the so-called “drag effect”, which consists in attracting other activities and/or investments to the region (BRUM; DALFOVO, D.A. BENFICA, 2011). Certainly, the growth of the sectors involved with soybeans, from the expansion of agricultural areas, technologies and investments in processing industries, provide positive results for the population of cities, such as the generation of more jobs, more investment in education and professional training, consequently, there are better sources of income and services (DERANI; SCHOLZ, 2017). As for negative externalities, biomes and biodiversity are directly affected by the expansion of soybean monoculture. Intensive agriculture, especially that linked to agribusiness of this oilseed, increases the participation in the conversion of native vegetation cover. With the increase in soybean production, caused by the greater incentive of the government, the planted area also increased (33 million tons in 2000 to 95 million tons in 2016, an increase of www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture 187.88%), which causes the increase in deforestation and, with it , damage to the environment (SOUZA; ROCK; RIBEIRO, 2013). As a result, biodiversity loss is the main environmental response to deforestation and is also totally irreversible when there is co-evolution, that is, an interdependent evolution of species. Deforestation destroys habitats of various animal and plant species, and puts their existence at risk (ARAÚJO, 2014). In addition, studies (NOBRE et al., 2009; SANTOS et al., 2011), reinforce the thesis, that the advance of soybeans and the conversion of vegetation cover can cause serious hydrological and regional climate changes, such as increased temperature, changes in rainfall patterns and changes in availability of water. Soybean monoculture can also cause soil impoverishment and contamination, due to the indiscriminate use of fertilizers and pesticides (DEUS; BAKONYI, 2012). Therefore, the advance of sojiculture causes positive and negative externalities that need to be studied, which justifies this research, whose relevance is increased by the elaboration of information necessary to stimulate positive externalities and minimize the negative and, finally, achieve the objective, which is to conduct a quantitative qualitative research, in relation to externalities in the municipality of Paragominas, and the advancement of sojiculture, besides generating data that allow an adequate balance. 2. LITERATURE REVIEW In Brazil, soybeans have been the fastest growing crop in cultivated area, and the extraordinary expansion of production in the last 20 years is explained by the increase in planted area and productivity (KUPLICH, CAPONE; COSTA, 2018). This cultivated area increased by 378.5% and productivity advanced 64.2% in the decades from 1970 to 2000 (PAMPLANA, 2017). As a result, oilseeds provide great capacity to the Brazilian agricultural sector, due to the territorial importance (27.7 million hectares planted in 2012/2013, equivalent to 52% of temporary crops), although it has not always been so (ARAÚJO; BRIDGE, 2015). This was due to the gradual migration to Paraná, expanded to the midwest, initially through www.nucleodoconhecimento.com.br Positive and negative externalities due to the advance of sojiculture Mato Grosso do Sul, and later to other states (GAZZONI, 2013; MR. SILVA; RODRIGUES, 2016). According to data from the National Supply Company – CONAB (OLIVEIRA NETO, 2017), currently, five states located in the South-Central Region of Brazil (Goiás, Mato Grosso, Mato Grosso do Sul, Paraná and Rio Grande do Sul) concentrate 75% of the area cultivated with (25.8 million hectares) and 77% of national production (79.25 million tonnes). The consequence of this migration has become the important role for the development of municipalities, as occurs in Sorriso – MT, which presents good socioeconomic indices, such as the passage of per capita income from approximately R$ 7,846.00 in 1999 to R$ 25,935.00 in 2005. This economic growth can also be noticed in relation to gross domestic product – GDP and, according to the Mato Grosso Department of Finance, it was R$ 207 million in 1998, reaching R$ 706 million in 2003, which means a growth of 342% in five years. Of this total, soybeans participate with 40% and, considering the entire primary sector of the municipality, this participation grows to 60% (FREDERICO, 2011; GIARETTA, 2017). This can be seen by the expansion of the soybean-sed area, which grew, in relation to the total area of the municipality, from 40.7% in 2000 to 63.7% in 2006. However, part of deforestation in Sorriso is directly due to the planting of oilseeds, which occupies the second place among the municipalities of Mato Grosso with the highest percentage of deforestation, equivalent to 68.3%.