Agriculture encompasses the economic activity responsible for food production, which throughout history has occupied the fertile lands of river valleys and subsequently developed techniques and procedures that made the soils more productive, always seeking greater productivity. With the advent of industry and the strengthening of cities, agriculture became a sector dependent on industrial technical innovations, and an interdependence between sectors was established. It is agriculture that generates the food consumed by the entire population, whether rural or urban. (LIMA; DE ASSIS SILVA; DE FREITAS IWATA, 2019).
Historically, the sectors that comprise a country's economy are classified as the primary sector, the secondary sector, and the tertiary sector. Agriculture is included in the primary sector, which encompasses agricultural, livestock, and extractive activities (LIMA; DE ASSIS SILVA; DE FREITAS IWATA, 2019).
Generally speaking, agriculture is defined as the set of techniques used to cultivate plants in order to obtain food, fiber, energy, raw materials for clothing, construction, medicine, tools, etc. Its origins date back to the Neolithic period more than 10,000 years ago, in a few small and relatively small regions of the planet. Although its beginnings date back to very ancient times, it is worth remembering that humankind emerged more than 100,000 years ago. It was during this historical period that the evolution from chipped stone to polished stone occurred, as well as the emergence of ceramics (MAZOYER; ROUDART, 2010).
It is noteworthy that initially, the tools used in agricultural practice were not specifically created for that purpose, such as sickles, mills, and ceramic storage containers. With the continuous development of new tools, agriculture became prominent in food production and the maintenance of societies, along with the use of draft animals incorporated into the production process (LIMA; DE ASSIS SILVA; DE FREITAS IWATA, 2019).
With the development of agriculture through advances in techniques, populations began to settle more firmly in specific locations, culminating in accelerated population growth and a greater demand for land to produce cereals to feed humanity. Changes in dietary habits eventually led to a crisis in the agricultural system, which revealed its deficient capacity for food production. Responses to these problems arose in the form of wars between communities or families and population migrations (OLIVEIRA JÚNIOR, 1989).
The increase in agricultural production over time, which occurred as a result of changes in production methods and the advent of new equipment and production methods, formed the basis of the agricultural revolutions in the contemporary era. These revolutions contributed to modifying the previously known production structure with the addition of new equipment and changes in the world of work regarding the social division of labor (MAZOYER; ROUDART, 2010).
MODERNIZING AGRICULTURE
Traditional agriculture, known as Agriculture 1.0, is characterized by low production and modest use of technology. It is seen as subsistence work, with artisanal equipment and the use of animal traction. It is still practiced on many properties in Brazil, but lost much ground at the beginning of the 20th century (SANTOS, 2019; SANTOS et al., 2019).
In the 1950s, machines powered by combustion engines began to replace animals, initiating the phase we call Agriculture 2.0, starting with large-scale production and the commercialization of inputs and production that transcended the territorial boundaries of countries (SANTOS, 2019; SANTOS et al. 2019).
Between 1990 and 2010, the so-called Agriculture 3.0 gained ground, and in different production areas, complementary studies began to be observed and carried out to provide more precision to the cultural practices employed. This was the beginning of Precision Agriculture, and technologies such as satellite georeferencing began to indicate with great precision the real need for both fertilization and irrigation in each area (MIRANDA et al, 2017).
After 2010, Agriculture 4.0 emerged, incorporating all previously used technologies with increased automation and connectivity. Autonomous machines and vehicles, drones, and animals with sensors are directly connected to a central system that processes all the information, allowing decisions to be made more efficiently. This is known as Smart Agriculture (MASSRUHÁ; LEITE, 2016).
GREEN REVOLUTION
The term Green Revolution was coined in 1968 by William S. Gaud, director of the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), to describe the increase in food production resulting from the transfer of technology to other parts of the developing world (CUNHA et al., 2010; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
The Green Revolution promoted the use of pesticides, fertilizers, and machinery in agriculture, which took place in various parts of the world in the post-World War II period. This process of modernizing agriculture depended on a set of technical, social, political, and especially economic variables (SERRA et al., 2016; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
GREEN REVOLUTION IN BRAZIL
Based on the assumption that the industrial sector began supplying agriculture with the necessary production inputs, a reciprocal agreement had to be established; that is, to maintain the industrial sector, agriculture should offer "labor" and raw materials to the agro-industrial sector, both in the domestic and foreign markets (ANDERSOM et al., 2020). Once this relationship was established, starting in the 1950s, companies headquartered in the First World began to establish themselves in Brazil, initiating the formation of the CAI – Brazilian Agro-industrial Complex (TOLENTINO, 2016; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
However, the establishment of a production sector focused on agricultural goods only occurred in Brazil at the end of the 1960s. At this time, it became possible to implement agricultural development on a national scale, a process known as "modernization of agriculture" (MARAFON, 1998; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
To further the modernization of Brazilian agriculture, the federal government opened credit lines, creating the National Rural Credit System (SNCR), which was primarily intended to meet the demands of large landowners, allowing farmers access to production inputs and strengthening the Brazilian Agro-industrial Complex (SORDI, 1980; SOUZA et al., 2020).
The modernization of Brazilian agriculture was focused on large producers; old labor relations between large landowners and peasants deteriorated; mechanization took the place of many, and they were forced to move to large centers in search of employment in industries; Brazil went from a country with the majority of the population in the countryside to a predominantly urban country (TOLENTINO, 2016; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
In Brazil, no-till farming has been widely adopted since the 1970s, especially in crops such as soybeans, corn, and wheat. This practice has been fundamental in transforming regions like the Cerrado into major agricultural hubs, promoting greater productivity and sustainability. Currently, the country is a world leader in the application of this technique, with millions of hectares managed under the system.
The practice of no-till farming has helped consolidate the country as one of the world's largest grain producers, increasing efficiency in regions such as the Cerrado and encouraging the adoption of more sustainable agricultural practices.
Direct planting is therefore one of the pillars of modern agricultural development, combining economic gains.
In the 1990s, Brazil experienced a strong and progressive increase in agricultural productivity, transforming it into one of the world's largest food producers and exporters. However, other challenges remained, such as a more sustainable and environmentally sound agriculture (in my view, this is precisely where we began a revolution in terms of sustainability, as it was in the 1990s that no-till farming began to be disseminated in Brazil), and a greater appreciation for small producers who, expelled from the countryside, were relegated to the peripheries of large capitals (VIEIRA FILHO, 2018; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
BRAZIL: VALUING AGRICULTURE
Between the years 1950 and 1970, Brazilian agriculture was rudimentary and manual labor prevailed; the use of machinery on farms was almost non-existent (SANTOS, 2019; ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
According to Schuh and Alves (1971), very little was known about soil dynamics, which limited the ability to generate new, more productive varieties. Similarly, the lack of knowledge in livestock farming was significant; there was no understanding of which combinations of activities were most profitable, and little research was conducted. The result was low yield per hectare and low livestock production, with increasingly larger areas required for production, generating environmental impacts such as erosion and siltation.
This period was marked by strong industrialization; the purchasing power of the population increased along with the number of inhabitants, but the countryside did not keep pace. Productive expansion in the countryside was necessary to ensure that the industrialization process could be maintained (CAMPOS et al., 2019).
It was necessary to implement public policies to increase production and productivity, such as increasing research and development, promoting rural extension, and offering low-cost credit (EMBRAPA, 2018). To meet external demand, innovations in production processes were made through state policies to increase agricultural credit and encourage research with the creation of bodies such as the Brazilian Agricultural Research Corporation – EMBRAPA (LOBÃO, 2018).
Brazil is privileged by its abundance of natural resources that favor agricultural practices, but what has made the difference in the last 50 years is the investment in research (EMBRAPA, 2018).
Crops previously considered to be for temperate climates, such as soybeans, are now cultivated in all regions of Brazil. We are producing grapes in the semi-arid region, something never before imagined. And so, there are several examples of what has happened to agricultural production in Brazil, especially since the 1970s. With the expansion of agriculture, several cities emerged, such as São Gabriel do Oeste and Chapadão do Sul in Mato Grosso do Sul; Sorriso, Primavera do Leste, and Querência in Mato Grosso; and Luís Eduardo Magalhães in Bahia. Several other cities have become development hubs thanks to the expansion of agriculture, such as Dourados, MS; Londrina and Maringá in Paraná; Rondonópolis in Mato Grosso; Balsas in Maranhão; Rio Verde in Goiás; Uberlândia in Minas Gerais, among many others (EMBRAPA, 2023).
In 1972, the then Minister of Agriculture, Luís Fernando Cirne Lima, through Ordinance No. 143, established a working group to analyze the Brazilian Agricultural Research System, with a view to making the process of modernizing the countryside more effective. Through this group, EMBRAPA was created, being the institution that contemplated the largest volume of resources and the largest number of researchers (MENGEL; AQUINO, 2015).
The initial objective in creating Embrapa was to devise a production system that integrated farmers, machinery manufacturers, input suppliers, and processors of agricultural products (MENGEL; AQUINO, 2015).
Efforts to increase production and productivity would necessarily involve an increase in research that could make the production system more integrated and developed (ROMMINGER, 2017).
Advances in genetic improvement in agriculture and soil management, such as the use of fertilizers, combined with public policies and the competence of producers, have contributed to a significant increase in production and productivity over the last 50 years (EMBRAPA, 2018).
Investments in research were fundamental in transforming Brazil into a major food exporter (LOBÃO, 2018). Embrapa played a key role in modernizing Brazilian agriculture, as a source of knowledge and new technologies, and was also responsible for expanding the agricultural frontier into the Cerrado (ROMMINGER, 2017).
REGENERATIVE AGRICULTURE
Regenerative agriculture, in its holistic and sustainable vision, brings several advantages to agricultural cultivation systems and the environment, such as: better use of soils, according to their suitability; recovery of degraded areas; use of biological inputs; enhancement and optimization of natural resources and soil microorganisms; and assistance in reversing climate change (DIAS, 2023).
The term "regenerative agriculture" was coined in the 1980s by Robert Rodale (founder of the Rodale Institute), with the aim of improving soil quality using organic techniques (MACHADO and RHODEN, 2022). According to Rodale (2014), regenerative agriculture improves resources instead of destroying or depleting them, encouraging continuous innovation in farming, focusing on environmental, social, and economic well-being. Regenerative agriculture is described by Rhodes (2017) as a process that improves soil health and restores a highly degraded environment, contributing to its productivity. In this way, the depletion of natural resources (soil and water) is avoided, creating a sustainable environment for food cultivation.
According to LaCanne and Lundgren (2018), there are five practices that are considerably associated with regenerative agriculture: (1) Minimizing soil preparation; (2) Eliminating bare soil; (3) Promoting crop diversity; (4) Encouraging water infiltration into the soil; and (5) Integrating livestock and crop operations. These conservation practices have the potential to accumulate organic carbon in the soil, increasing water and nutrient retention capacity and therefore potentially contributing to the sequestration of atmospheric carbon by natural means. More information on the topic of regenerative agriculture is available in a complete text on the blog.
Agriculture 4.0
Agriculture 4.0 is generating increasing political, economic, and environmental interest. Techniques such as genome-wide crop editing, satellite monitoring of meteorological variables, agricultural management software, pesticide and irrigation control sensors, and digitized mapping of soil fertility, humidity, temperature, and physical-geo-chemical conditions characterize Agriculture 4.0 (CLAPP; RUDER, 2020; THIELE, 2020). These practices have been spreading for some time in developed countries, particularly in agricultural powerhouses like the United States, given the increase in productivity they provide. We can also observe a recent movement of incorporating this practice in middle-income agricultural powerhouses, such as Brazil (VIOLA and MENDES, 2022).
Recent studies have focused on the environmental aspects of Agriculture 4.0, particularly regarding climate change, the use of agrochemicals, and the efficient use of natural resources (VIOLA and MENDES, 2022). Nicholson and Reynolds (2020) explored how geoengineering can help reverse anthropogenic climate change if used in the production of low-cost, zero-carbon energy, electricity storage, and CO2 removal from the atmosphere. Others have analyzed experiments and informal networks of technological diffusion and how they affect the governance of sustainability (BERNARDS et al., 2020). Some are studying synthetic biology applied to assisted evolution, de-extinction, and biodiversity restoration technologies (THIELE, 2020), while others seek to understand the interrelationship between genetically modified organisms and gene-carrying organisms, and how they can contribute to nature conservation (REYNOLDS, 2020).
With Agriculture 4.0, the intensity, robustness, and technological complexity of agro-industrial systems advance considerably. This results in: the generation of an unprecedented volume of data on national agriculture, which can be used as inputs for sectoral policies; a progressive reduction in the total workforce employed, with considerable impacts on the agricultural labor market in the country, in addition to the increasing specialization required for this workforce; and the need for regulatory adjustments in terms of data privacy policies and the security of computer systems (public and private) that manage and store data on Brazilian agriculture. In this scenario, the potential of Agriculture 4.0 for a low-carbon transition has been debated and can be examined through the models of Transitions to Sustainability (VIOLA and MENDES, 2022).
ILSA IN THIS CONTEXT
Ilsa is a global leader in biotechnology, transforming renewable raw materials into high-performance products for agriculture. It utilizes modern and sustainable industrial methods, which are an excellent solution for environmental liabilities in various industrial sectors.
The result of these processes are highly efficient fertilizers, which help organic and specialized agriculture to increase the productivity and quality of crops, in an increasingly responsible and conscious way.
The Azogel and Gelamin matrices, granulated and liquid respectively, are rich in organic nitrogen and amino acids. Both matrices are obtained through distinct hydrolysis processes. Furthermore, they have varied formulations that meet the nutritional demands of different crops. This combination unlocks the soil's potential, as the organic matrix will influence biological and physical parameters of the soil, while the mineral part of the fertilizer will act on chemical parameters. Therefore, the influence of these fertilizers on the soil is more comprehensive, considering all parameters responsible for soil quality and health.
Ilsa's products act from maintaining soil quality to plant metabolism, thus contributing to the efficiency of the cultivation system used in different crops and aligning with modern concepts such as regenerative agriculture.
FINAL CONSIDERATIONS
When we consider the historical advancement in the agricultural production process and its impacts on the development of societies, it becomes clear that it was fundamental in expanding the coexistence of human beings, favoring, over time, the exchange of knowledge and promoting technological leaps that interfered in the economic, social and political spheres (ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
In Brazil, despite the fact that in the early centuries of its existence, its colonizers were interested in developing agriculture more geared towards external demand, with the Green Revolution in the 20th century, it began to explore its true productive potential (ANDERSOM et al., 2020).
In light of this, agriculture is keeping pace with technological advancements, leading to increasingly satisfactory results in terms of achieving higher productivity without significantly expanding new areas, reaffirming the efficiency of integrating agriculture, technology, and farmers.
Organic and organomineral fertilizers will be crucial in future agricultural advancements.
They work in sustainable farming: They have been fundamental in agricultural systems such as agroecology and organic production, where there is greater concern for soil health and environmental impact.
Restoration of degraded soils: Its application is effective in areas with low fertility, helping to restore impoverished soils.
Organomineral fertilizers represent a strategic innovation for the future of agriculture, especially in the face of global challenges related to food security, sustainability, and climate change. By integrating organic and mineral components, they can play an essential role in the transition to more resilient and productive agricultural systems.
ILSA's organic matrices represent an innovative and sustainable alternative for agricultural advancement. These fertilizers transform an industrial byproduct, which could be discarded as waste, into a valuable input for agriculture, promoting a circular economy and reducing environmental impact by transforming an environmental liability into high-performance fertilizers rich in nutrients such as nitrogen and organic carbon, stimulating microbial activity and promoting healthier and more productive soil.
References
ANDERSON, Carlos Guida et al. The modernization of agriculture and the Brazilian case. SUSTAINABILITY IN AGRIBUSINESS, p. 53, 2020.
BERNARDS, N.; CAMPBELL-VERDUYN, M. Understanding technological change in global finance through infrastructures: Introduction to Review of International Political Economy Special Issue 'The Changing Technological Infrastructures of Global Finance'. Review of International Political Economy, v.26, n.5, p.773-789, 2019.
CAMPOS, JRS; LEMOS, J. .JS; SILVA, LMR. Technological progress and resource allocation in Brazilian agriculture. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, v. 26, n. 2, p. 195‐212, 2019.
CLAPP, J.; RUDER, SL Precision technologies for agriculture: Digital farming, gene-edited crops, and the politics of sustainability. Global Environmental Politics, v.20, n.3, pp.49-69, 2020.
DIAS, Vinícius Santos et al. Regenerative agriculture: a case study in commercial soybean farming in the municipality of Rosário do Sul, Rio Grande do Sul. 2023.
EMBRAPA. O futuro da agricultura brasileira, c2018. Página inicial. Disponível em https://www.embrapa.br/documents/10180/9543845/Vis%C3%A3o+2030+-+o+futuro+da+agricultura+brasileira/2a9a0f27-0ead-991a-8cbf-af8e89d62829
EMBRAPA, Article – The evolution of agriculture in Brazil. 2023. Available at https://www.embrapa.br/busca-de-noticias/-/noticia/81665485/artigo—a-evolucao-da-agricultura-do-brasil
LACANNE,CE;LUNDGREN,JGRegenerative agriculture: merging farming and natural resource conservation profitably. PeerJ, 2018.
LIMA, Antônia Francisca; DE ASSIS SILVA, Edvânia Gomes; DE FREITAS IWATA, Bruna. Agriculture and family farming in Brazil: a literature review. Retratos de Assentamentos, v. 22, n. 1, p. 50-68, 2019.
LOBÃO, MSP Rural environment, agriculture and agricultural modernization: a theoretical discussion. Revista Observatorio de la Economía Latinoamericana, July, 2018.
MACHADO, Marco Antonio; RHODEN, Anderson Clayton. Application of regenerative agriculture in Brazil: a case study in western Santa Catarina. Annals of Agronomy, v. 2, n. 1, p. 14-36, 2022.
MASSRUHÁ, SMFS; LEITE, MAA. Digital agriculture. RECoDAF – Electronic Journal of Digital Skills for Family Farming, Tupã, v. 2, n. 1, p. 72-88, Jan./Jun. 2016.
MAZOYER, M.; ROUDART, L. History of agriculture in the world: from the Neolithic to the contemporary crisis. Brasília; São Paulo: Nead/MDA; Ed. Unesp, 2010.
MENGEL, Alex Alexandre; DE AQUINO, Silvia Lima. THE MODERNIZATION OF AGRICULTURE AND THE CREATION OF EMBRAPA: TRANSFORMATIONS IN BRAZILIAN AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH. CAMPO-TERRITÓRIO: revista de geografia agrária, v. 10, n. 21, p. 4-27, 2015.
MIRANDA, ACC; VERÍSSIMO, AM; CEOLIN, AC Precision Agriculture: A mapping of the Scielo database. Electronic Journal of Organizational Management, v. 15, p. 129-137. 2017.
NICHOLSON, S.; REYNOLDS, J. Taking Technology Seriously: Introduction to the Special Issue on New Technologies and Global Environmental Politics. Global Environmental Politics, v.20, n.3, pp.1-8., 2020.
OLIVEIRA JÚNIOR. PHB Notes on the history of agriculture through time. Rio de Janeiro: AS-PTA, 1989.
RHODES, C. The Imperative for Regenerative Agriculture. Science Progress, v100, pp 80-129, 2017.
RODALE-INSTITUTE. Regenerative Organic Agriculture and Climate Change: A Down-to-Earth Solution to Global Warming. Kutztown, PA: RodaleInstitute, 2014.
ROMMINGER, AE. Agricultural Innovation: Embrapa and the Sectoral Innovation System. Doctoral Thesis. Brasília: UNB, 2017.
SANTOS, AO; CAVICHIOLI, FA; SOARES, NM; CLAUDINO, TS AGRICULTURA 4.0.SIMTEC ‐ Symposium on Technology of Fatec Taquaritinga, v. 6, n. 1, p. 38‐47, Dec. 22, 2019.
SANTOS, RF. Rural credit in the modernization of Brazilian agriculture. Revista de Economia e Sociologia Rural, v. 26, n. 4, p. 393‐404, 2019.
SERRA, LS; MENDES, MRF; SOARES, MVA; MONTEIRO, I. P. Green Revolution: reflections on the issue of pesticides. Revista do CEDS, São Luiz, MA, v. 1, n. 4, p. 2-25, Jan./Jul. 2016.
THIELE, LP Nature 4.0: Assisted Evolution, De-extinction, and Ecological Restoration Technologies. Global Environmental Politics, v.20, n.3, pp.9-27, 2020.
VIOLA, Eduardo; MENDES, Vinícius. Agriculture 4.0 and climate change in Brazil. Environment & Society, v. 25, p. e02462, 2022.
Authors:
Agr Eng. Dr. Angélica Schmitz Heinzen
Agricultural Eng. Msc. Thiago Stella de Freitas
Agricultural Engineer Tuíra Barcellos
