According to Costa et al, “Brazil was the first country in the world to implement a National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production”. It is therefore worthy of notice that the Policy has been widely implemented in the country, succeeding as a good example of a multi-sectoral public policy, despite the challenges it still faces. Furthermore, PNAPO has served as inspiration for Brazilian States (such as Minas Gerais, Rio Grande do Sul, Goiás, São Paulo and Amazonas), the Federal District and Municipalities to elaborate their own state and municipal policies, following the guidelines of the National Policy and adapting them to their own realities and necessities. Hence PNAPO is likely suitable to be transferred to other situations.

The National Policy (PNAPO) has been implemented in Brazil since 2012, aiming at fostering sustainable agricultural practices and healthy food consumption habits; empowering family farmers, traditional communities, women and youth; and promoting sustainable rural development through specific programs and financing for smallholder farming. It is a multi-sectoral and multi-stakeholder interdisciplinary policy on a federal level, whose initiatives have been implemented throughout the five Brazilian regions, with verifiable results.

Some programmes and initiatives currently included in the flagship of PNAPO already existed before its creation. Nonetheless, with the establishment of the policy and the creation of CNAPO, those programmes have been strategically articulated and integrated into PNAPO’s general objectives and working plan, guaranteeing more participative planning, implementation and monitoring processes.

One of the PNAPO’s main instruments is the National Plan for Agroecology and Organic Production (PLANAPO), which must always include at least the following elements: overview/diagnosis, strategies and goals, programmes, projects, actions, indicators, deadlines and a management structure (Article 5 of Federal Decree 7,794).

Conservation Agreements (CAs) are binding grant contracts created and agreed upon by specific communities and the ECF. CAs set out clear, attainable and realistic conservation objectives and determine the scope of conservation measures to be implemented within communities that demonstrate the have the organization, motivation and commitment to follow 10-year habitat management plans. Conservation objectives are determined by the ECF and the local community using expert and local knowledge. Each agreement is tailored to the identified needs in the target community and the local landscape. These contracts bind communities to protect ecosystems but also assist traditional land users to use the land in a sustainable way. 

The communities that sign Conservation Agreements have been selected to do so because they show initiative, community involvement and potential through the FPA process and establishment of a CBO. In order to ensure the sustainability of the projects, the compliance of Conservation Agreements is monitored. Each community must submit annual technical reports. In case they fail to perform the planned activities, the payments under the agreement may be suspended until they meet the requirements, or subsequently terminated if they don’t comply for more than a year.

AGRUPAR could well serve as a model for other cities and form the basis for a national policy on local production.

CONQUITO has favoured observation tours and exchanges of experiences as well as transfer of methodologies, including among ministries and NGOs, for example the Ministry of Agriculture, Livestock, Aquaculture and Fisheries and the Peace Corps.

Since 2015, AGRUPAR contributed to both the City Region Food Systems Project of FAO and the RUAF Foundation, which evaluated Quito’s food system. As a result, AGRUPAR staff decided to work towards a food policy for the city in a more systemic sense, within which urban agriculture is a strategic activity.

Whereas in the past the focus of policy support for organic farming was often production-oriented, the current Danish OAP considers market development (including support for certain marketing channels), promotion and awareness, as well as public procurement, as priorities. The OAP is a mix of push and pull actions. Push effects are meant to increase production, while pull measures aim at increasing the demand for organic products.

If we look at the pull measures, a key action was to stimulate the demand for organic products by consumers and in private and public kitchens, such as schools and hospitals. For these activities, 6.4 million EUR were earmarked in the 2015-2018 period.

Once demonstration sites are selected, local ASM groups receive training and are contracted to implement FRM through six steps:

1. Preparation & Planning: degradation, boundary, hydrological & equipment assessments; labor, volume estimates; waste management; OHS standards
2. Technical Rehabilitation: infill, regrading and reprofiling; use of limited mechanisation
3. Topsoils: identification, conservation and re-distribution across sites
4. Biological Rehabilitation: topsoil enrichment ; natural regeneration assessments; identification of native and key vegetation communities; seed collection; seeds and natural fertilizers distribution into topsoils; tree, shrub and grass plantings
5. Mitigation Hierarchy: integrating rehabilitation planning into active ASM design and operations so as to reduce primary environmental impacts and unnecessary rehabilitation efforts
6. Handover of completed rehabilitation site to relevant government administrations for approval/sign-off

On the basis that government ministries are willing and able to work together to develop solutions to address impacts of ASM on the wider environment, Protected Areas and on stakeholders impacted by such mining activity, a national working group (which includes such ministries, agencies and relevant representative stakeholders) needs to be established. This will help steer the process of project engagement with local government, artisanal miners and wider stakeholders at the local level to set the scene for Frugal Rehabilitation Demonstration (FRD). A key step in this process is to select sites for FRD that can serve the development and application of the methodology within the ecological, economic and social context. The purpose of establishing this FRM working group is to ensure a participatory, consultative approach to the development of the methodology, and to enable a demonstration site selection process that ensures an informed and strategic approach based on agreed criteria. Sites selected for methodology demonstration need to be typical, representative and associated with formalised ASM capacity to undertake the rehabilitation.

Acknowledging and identifying conflicts between ministries and sectoral stakeholders is important. It is important at the early stages of an initiative to recognise these problems and to establish and work through a consultative platform to make the case for a methodology that is of value to all stakeholders, that is inclusive of artisanal miners and the stakeholders impacted by such mining as well as government ministries. It is only through such collaboration that a methodology can be developed that addresses environmental concerns, meets artisanal miners needs for performance-based incentives and access to land, and can be valued by government in formalising condition-based permitting for mining. It is within the context and platform of engagement that the FRM can be demonstrated to be of value to all stakeholders, and deliver outcomes at the local as well as national level.

As a strategy of connection and contribution of the citizenship, because in the first edition (2013) We were able to finance all expenses, a conservation fund was generated from the collection of the cost of the registration of the event, the fund was delivered to the Promoter Group CPY and it was invested in conservation actions and sustainable use of the territory, with the fund was bought trap cameras for monitoring biodiversity.
This proposal was not sustainable for following editions, due to the considerable increase of the participation and the associated costs, currently we use the fee of the registrations to complete the event financing.

To improve local governance in the Sumpul River, it was crucial to mainstream the ecosystem approach into land management, and train accordingly water local governance structures, local authorities, and farmers. Together they implement EbA measures to face drought and variability such as: soil conservation practices, protected spring water and implemented agroforestry systems.

Capacity building was delivered to: 

• >100 farmers through a "learning by doing" approach to attain demonstrative results in the field. The EbA measures implemented focused on the ecosystem services of water and soil, on productive diversification and on mitigating the impacts of climate change and variability (winds and extreme rainfall) on crops and goods and  improve water infiltration and availability in the area. 
• Water Committes on organizational and management skills as well as on integral water management, in order to influence their understanding of the importance of water ecosystem services.
• Leader and farmer women were trained on communication skills.
• Municipal officers were part of a regional climate change adaptation training and exchange of experience with other 30 local governements of Mesoamerica.