Brazil’s National Policy for Agroecology and Organic Production (PNAPO)

Publicado: 13 Mayo 2019
Última edición: 02 Octubre 2020
remove_red_eye 3725 Vistas


Developed as a result of intense civil society engagement and structured around seven comprehensive guidelines that encompass the most relevant aspects of sustainable food chains and systems, PNAPO is a unique federal framework policy for advancing agroecology and organic production in Brazil. In its first cycle of activities it led to impressive quantitative results in terms of advancing the agroecological agenda in the country (budget and initiative-wise), investing over EUR 364 million, resulting in visible large-scale improvements for smallholders and vulnerable groups. Amongst others, it constructed over 140,000 cisterns and helped 5,300 municipalities to invest 30% or more of their school feeding budgets in organic and agroecological products purchased from family farmers. For its achievements, Brazil’s PNAPO was recognized with the Future Policy Silver Award 2018, awarded by the World Future Council in partnership with FAO and IFOAM – Organics International.


Scale of implementation
Bosques tropicales de hoja perenne
Campos de cultivo
Desierto caliente
Ecosistemas de agua dulce
Ecosistemas de pastizales
Ecosistemas del desierto
Ecosistemas forestales
Humedales (pantano, turberas)
Piscina, lago, estanque
Pradera tropical, sabana, matorral
Río, corriente
Selva baja caducifolia
Actores locales
Adaptación al cambio climático
Geodiversidad y geoconservación
Medios de vida sostenibles
Salud y bienestar humano
Seguridad alimentaria
Servicios ecosistémicos
Lluvia errática
Calor extremo
Reducción de los glaciares
Incremento de temperatura
Degradación de tierras y bosques
Pérdida de la biodiversidad
Cambio estacional
Mareas altas (tormentas)
Usos conflictivos / impactos acumulativos
Pérdida de ecosistemas
Contaminación (incluida la eutrofización y la basura)
Cosecha insostenible, incluida la sobrepesca
Gestión ineficaz de los recursos financieros
Desarrollo de Infraestructura
Falta de acceso a financiación a largo plazo
Falta de oportunidades de ingresos alternativos
Extracción de recursos físicos
Cambios en el contexto socio-cultural
Falta de capacidad técnica
Falta de conciencia del público y de los responsables de la toma de decisiones
Deficiente vigilancia y aplicación de la ley
Deficiente gobernanza y participación
Falta de seguridad alimentaria
Desempleo / pobreza
Sustainable development goals
ODS 1 - Fin de la pobreza
ODS 2 - Hambre cero
ODS 3 - Salud y bienestar
ODS 5 - Igualidad de género
ODS 6 - Agua limpia y saneamiento
ODS 8 - Trabajo decente y crecimiento económico
ODS 9 - Industria, innovacióne e infraestructura
ODS 10- Reducción de las desigualidades
ODS 11 - Ciudades y comunidades sostenibles
ODS 12 - Producción y consumo responsables
ODS 13 - Acción por el clima
ODS 15 - Vida de ecosistemas terrestres
ODS 16 - Paz, justicia e instituciones sólidas
Aichi targets
Meta 1: Aumento de la sensibilization sobre la biodiversidad
Meta 2: Valores de biodiversidad integrados
Meta 4: Producción y consumo sostenibles
Meta 5: Pérdida de hábitat reducida a la mitad o reducida
Meta 7: Agricultura, acuicultura y silvicultura
Meta 8: Reducción de la contaminación
Meta 9: Especies exóticas invasoras prevenidas y controladas
Meta 10: Ecosistemas vulnerables al cambio
Meta 11: Áreas protegidas y conservadas
Meta 12: Reducir el riesgo de extinción
Meta 13: Protección de la diversidad genética
Meta 14: Los servicios ecosistemicos
Meta 15: Restauración de ecosistemas y resiliencia
Meta 16: Acceso y distribución de los beneficios de los recursos genéticos
Meta 17: Estrategias y planes de acción para la biodiversidad
Meta 18: Conocimiento tradicional
Meta 19: Intercambio de información y conocimiento
Meta 20: Movilización de recursos de todas las fuentes
Business engagement approach
Compromiso directo con una empresa
Compromiso directo con asociaciones




It is worthy of notice that the Brazilian agroecological movements encompass actors from multiple spheres of society, e.g. peasant youth and women, landless workers, traditional communities. They date back to the 1970’s social movement for an alternative agriculture, which was one of the first to formally address in country the problems related to the environmental degradation caused by the Green Revolution and its impacts on food production. This movement was then strengthened by the arrival in Brazil of specific scientific literature on agroecology and by the creation of certain organizations, such as the AS-PTA, ANA and ABA. In the mid-1990s, “the Brazilian agroecological movement made significant strides, gaining ground among social movements, NGOs, higher education and research institutions, as well as in technical support and rural extension programs”. Agroecological demands have thus acquired momentum in the country over the past fifteen years.


PLANAPO led to impressive quantitative results in terms of advancing the agroecological agenda and has likely improved the lives of millions of people, ie it constructed 143,000 cisterns, assisted 5,300 municipalities and trained 200,000 farmers.

¿ Cómo interactúan los building blocks en la solución?

Developing a pioneer framework policy on agroecology (BB1) has been the basis for setting up institutions for the coordination of measures (BB2) and implementing the policy (BB3). Together these builidng blocks built  PNAPO's potential as a transferable model (BB4).


PLANAPO led to impressive quantitative results in terms of advancing the agroecological agenda in Brazil. Among the numerous important outcomes of PLANAPO 2013-2015 and PNAPO we can highlight that it constructed 143,000 cisterns (initial goal was 60,000); assisted 5,300 municipalities to spend 30 per cent or more of their school meal programme budget on purchases of organic and agroecological products from family farmers (some municipalities even reach 100 per cent); assisted 393 rural family farming organizations; launched several public calls that enabled agroecological organizations to expand their staff on an unprecedented scale benefitting about 132,744 farming families; trained 7,722 technicians (initial goal was 2,000) and 52,779 farmers (one third of initial goal of 182,000); promoted 24 networks for agroecology; trained 960 professionals and political leaders on financing women in organic and agroecological agriculture, which benefitted 5,200 rural women in 20 different Brazilian States; supported 556 women’s networks, benefitting 5,566 rural women; adapted 600 native seeds banks to semiarid conditions and trained more than 12,000 farmers families hereon; and financed nine projects for seeds for agroecology.


Leandro Molina

I am Emerson Giacomelli. I am one of the peasants settled by the Brazil Agrarian Reform policy in the Chapel Settlement in Nova Santa Rita. The municipality is part of the Metropolitan region of Porto Alegre, in Rio Grande do Sul.

I am the son of small farmers of Ronda Alta, in the North region of Rio Grande do Sul. I got to know the Landless Workers Movement (MST) in 1985, when they occupied the old Fazenda Annoni, which is a symbol of the fight for land in my country. For believing in this fight, I camped in 1989 and five years later I was settled.

Today, I am President of the Cooperative of Settled workers from Porto Alegre (COOTAP) and I coordinate the Agroecological Rice Management Group, which brings together 363 families of the MST. In 2019, we estimate to harvest approximately 16 thousand tons of organic rice, in an area of ​​3,433 hectares, in 13 settlements and 15 municipalities. These data place the MST as the largest producer of organic rice in Latin America.

The productive, industrial and commercial processes are coordinated by COOTAP. We work with different cooperatives, such as the Cooperativa de Produção Agropecuária Nova Santa Rita (COOPAN), Cooperativa de  Agropecuária de Assentados de Tapes (COOPAT), and others.

The National Policy on Agroecology and Organic Production (PNAPO) was fundamental to the development of our project, since we accessed the Food Acquisition Programme (PAA), the National School Feeding Programme (PNAE) and Technical Assistance and Rural Extension (ATER), and other agroindustries. We were able to plan production, to enable families to stay in the field with work and income, to ensure the marketing of products and gain knowledge to improve the relationship between producer and consumer.

We sell rice in several states of Brazil and have exported since 2008 to several countries. We are now looking for new markets in Greece, Portugal, Spain, the Netherlands, the United Arab Emirates, China, Haiti, Jamaica, Costa Rica, among other places.However, with the current federal government, we are concerned about the possibility of extermination of these programmes that have helped us to develop a new type of agriculture that respects soil, water, air and all forms of life. The PAA has been weakened and we fear that the PNAE will have the same fate. The end of them represents less income, work, development, quality of life and will result, of course, in more migration to the big cities.

Contribuido por

Imagen de ingrid.heindorf_37209

Ingrid Heindorf World Future Council (WFC)

Other contributors

Federal University of Santa Catarina