Table 3. Overview of the main differences between drivers/components of the four participatory socioeconomic scenarios for the area for 2030.

Components I. Business as usual II. Community-based
III. Development and conservation IV. Progress and technology
National conjuncture Global and national instability Political and socioeconomic stability Social and political stability Political stability and socioeconomic instability

Market dynamics and international treaties Volatile markets without state control Protectionism

Economic treaties within alternative commercial alliances in Latin America

New international partnerships and trade agreements with EU, USA, Latin American countries Free trade agreement with EU and USA
Macroeconomic and sectoral policies Structural Adjustment Programs

Absent sectoral policies for rural areas

Subsidized social programs and
restrictive environmental plans, organic agriculture programs
Service-sector development (e.g., tourism), sustainable organic agriculture programs, environmental policies

Free competition and economic deregulation
External agents Role of state limited to poverty alleviation programs and food relief International funding supports conservation programs and active research institutes

International funds promote rural initiatives,
e.g. microcredit, and active research institutes

Foreign entrepreneurial investment
Development initiatives/income sources Agriculture retracts due to global prices/markets for rural commodities

Wealth stratification
Community /cooperative agropastoral initiatives

Few entrepreneurs and little investment
Job diversification

Product diversification

Ecotourism promoted by entrepreneurs

Payment for ecosystem services

Agroindustrial development

Economic growth for commercial ranchers and wealth stratification
Local governance Local corruption, lack of transparency, weak trade unions Reinforced local organizations

Effective environmental protection, control, and monitoring
Reinforced trade unions and partnerships

Upgraded systems for monitoring and controlling environmental protection

Strong trade unions among commercial ranchers

Weak local monitoring and control of environment
Distribution of/access to land, natural resources, and capital Progressive land abandonment

Proletarization, marginalization

Limited access to land and natural resources
Land redistribution/regulation (prevalence of small farming systems and household economies)

National top-down control for guaranteeing access to/use of natural resources
Land regulation, presence of different typologies of commercial and household economies

New local arrangements and rules for guaranteeing equal access and use of natural resources

Land concentration (deregulated and liberalized land markets)

Unequal access to natural resources

Land use and management Monofunctional land use (pastoral use) and intensification

Agropastoral and dry forest degradation
Monofunctional land use (agropastoral use)

Expansion of subsistence cultivation systems (traditional and agroecological low external inputs agriculture) and reforestation/
regeneration practices

Multifunctional land-use innovations in agropastoral systems management with agroecological semi-intensification (low external inputs agriculture and forest regeneration/
conservation practices)

Monofunctional land use (pastoral use)

High external inputs agriculture (intensification)

Dismantled subsistence systems
Labor market Economic stratification and labor exploitation persist, high out-migration Few or moderate opportunities in rural areas New job opportunities in a wide range of agricultural and service sectors Only agrarian workers

Few alternative opportunities in mechanized rural economies

Social cohesion Low community spirit /workers’ moral

Social and political conflicts over land and natural resources

Strong community-based protectionism among landless people Collaboration and partnerships among local users and trade unions Competitiveness and individualism deconstruct social ties
Culture, values, lifestyle Persistent corruption

Resistance to change among local traditional large landowners

Youth preference for urban lifestyle

Historical coping strategies

Strong sense of belonging
New rural lifestyle

New sense of belonging
(e.g., brand and green culture)
Weak sense of belonging

Urban lifestyle attracts people in rural areas
Infrastructure and technology Absence of investment Investments in agricultural extension programs Investment in green management practices (low-input technology) High levels of private investment in technology and infrastructure