ArticlePloS one2026
Climate resilience through bioeconomy: A mixed-methods protocol for assessing adaptation policies in rural settlements on the Amazon.
Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionClimate change intensifies social, economic, and environmental vulnerabilities in Amazonian rural communities, where dependence on natural resources and limited institutional capacity constrain adaptation. The bioeconomy is often proposed as an alternative pathway for sustainable development, yet empirical evidence of its role in resilience remains scarce.
objectiveThis study protocol presents a mixed methods design to evaluate climate adaptation policies and community resilience strategies in agrarian reform settlements, rural territories created through Brazil's land redistribution program, in Pará, Brazil. Although centered on a regional case, the protocol is structured to generate insights applicable to other socioecologically vulnerable rural contexts in the Amazon and comparable regions worldwide.
methodsThe study will be conducted in 15 municipalities across the three regional superintendencies of the National Institute for Colonization and Agrarian Reform. The design integrates (i) secondary data on socioeconomic, climatic, and policy indicators; (ii) semi-structured interviews with municipal managers (n = 1-3 per municipality); (iii) focus groups with community leaders (n = 8-12 per settlement); and (iv) household surveys (n = 20-50 families per settlement). Primary outcomes include the Income and Livelihood Diversification Index (ILDI), Climate Vulnerability Perception Scale (CVPS), Bioeconomy Engagement Index (BEI), and Reported Adaptive Capacity Index (RACI). Secondary measures include the Adaptation Strategy Diversity Index (ASDI) and a Municipal Climate Engagement Typology (MCET). Quantitative analyses will employ multilevel linear and generalized linear models (LMM/GLMM), while qualitative data will be analyzed through reflexive thematic analysis, with final integration achieved via a triangulation framework. EXPECTED
resultsThis study will generate a comprehensive framework integrating indicators of vulnerability, adaptive capacity, and bioeconomy engagement across agrarian reform settlements in the Eastern Amazon. By combining household surveys, qualitative fieldwork, and municipal-level policy analysis, the protocol provides a transparent, replicable approach for assessing local climate adaptation processes. The study is designed to inform municipal and state policymakers, support the strengthening of local adaptation initiatives, and contribute evidence relevant to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs 2, 13, and 15).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.