Sustainable Agriculture Management: Environmental, Economic and Social Conjunctures for Coffee Sector in Guerrero, via Traditional Knowledge Management

Abstract

Early studies on sustainability establish social, economic, and environmental improvement as the ultimate goal worldwide. This is true for nations or companies with significant economic and technological resources that apply indicators, data, and methodologies to manage harmonious, sustainable development; however, little is known about the management, integration, and measurement of unified social, economic, and environmental dimensions to achieve sustainable actions for agriculture. Therefore, under a qualitative-quantitative approach combining the knowledge management paradigm, sustainability criteria, and the log-linear statistical test, this paper investigates actions for sustainability around planting–harvesting–first disposal of the coffee circuit based on the tacit-explicit traditional knowledge of 55 members of its productive ecosystem from Guerrero, Mexico. The results show a statistical integration between environmental, economic, and social data with 0.000 (p < 0.05); a partial association on its effects with 0.209, 0.068, and 0.000, respectively (p > 0.05); the creation of on-site banks, training and assistance, and a state network for exchanging experiences as the conjectural actions that can show effects with 0.002, while the remaining were over >0.05 (p > 0.05). Governments, organizations, and researchers could extrapolate the model for sustainable agriculture management in the coffee-growing regions and for other crops.

1. Introduction

Early studies on sustainability establish social, economic, and environmental improvement as the ultimate goals of countries and industries worldwide. So far, there has been an arduous debate about the indicators, methodologies, and data needed to manage sustainable development balance [1,2,3,4]. Either way, nations and industries must use their resources to equitably manage a growing population’s environmental, economic, and social requirements [5,6,7] and consequently create specific actions to address their inhabitants’ needs [8].

In practice, there are several methods to achieving sustainability [9]; however, in recent years, knowledge management has begun to interest the international community, growing fast since the 1990s [10,11], and it is currently gaining importance in achieving sustainable development [12,13]. This paradigm, defined as the capability to create and use knowledge, establishes structures for gathering, combining, and converting knowledge assets to create new knowledge [14]. Most importantly, people gain new knowledge by combining their knowledge to address global sustainability challenges [15].

Therefore, it is reasonable to infer the relationship between social, economic, and environmental, with the combination of people’s knowledge through the knowledge management paradigm; however, despite studies within knowledge management used for creating, storage and sharing platforms, innovation practices, information and communication technologies and artificial intelligence to increase the capacity of institutions and companies with economic and technological resources [16,17,18,19,20,21], little is known on practical aspects of knowledge management and sustainability in the context of productive systems [22,23], particularly for the agricultural sector, creating new knowledge and integrating and measuring social, economic, and environmental dimensions, based on traditional knowledge that is under a significant sustainable gap.

Traditional knowledge, defined as the knowledge, know-how, skills, and practices that are developed, sustained, and passed on from generation to generation within a community, has been part of agricultural practice since the beginning of our time. Its management refers to the knowledge created by intellectual activity in a traditional environment, involving a tacit-explicit conversion to move from intangible to tangible actions, including experiences, practices, and innovations for agriculture [24,25]

In today’s world, traditional knowledge is called upon to answer the challenges of sustainable development and ensure environmental, social, and economic equity for achieving sustainable agriculture [26,27].

The above is based on the fact that although traditional knowledge can offer sustainable opportunities through science and technology [26], many studies still explore it without delving into its social, economic, or environmental dimensions explicitly. This is evident in the studies of [28,29,30], which propose technologies for sharing traditional knowledge without considering sustainability. This fracture is possibly due to the lack of accessibility of scientific knowledge in agricultural contexts and the disjointed dimensions of sustainability, resulting in the precarious social, economic, and environmental context in which most agricultural small producers live.

With around 1 billion agricultural producers around the world producing 35% of the food in the world applying their traditional knowledge [31,32], and under the concept of knowledge creation defined as the act of making available the knowledge created by individuals, amplifying it in a social context and selectively connecting it with existing knowledge [33], this paper aims to contribute to the literature addressing the research mentioned above gap by shedding more light on the relative issue between knowledge management and the integration and measurement of social, economic, and environmental dimensions, involving the interaction traditional knowledge of agricultural producers and its context, for the establishment of sustainability conjectural actions.

Mainly, this study investigates whether the practical application of the knowledge management paradigm can lead to the creation of actions in favor of social, economic, and environmental sustainability, using the socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization conversion framework in the circuit of planting–harvesting–first disposal of the coffee circuit from Guerrero, Mexico, transferring from tacit to explicit knowledge of the coffee productive ecosystem as elements of traditional knowledge that are the essential resource for achieving sustainability [14].

First, the tacit perspective was considered, with the knowledge, experiences, and practices of coffee producers (know-how) complemented by representatives of civil organizations, government, and civil society involved in applying socialization and internalization phases; likewise, the explicit meaning is taken to express tangible actions (know-what) in favor of social, economic, and environmental sustainability through externalization and combination. Second, there is evidence from the literature that social, economic, and environmental heterogeneities surround coffee’s agricultural production. For the above and considering that tacit knowledge is the company’s central resource for achieving a sustainable competitive advantage [34,35] but also given the precarious social and economic conditions at a small producer scale in the agricultural sector, this study begins with the following research question: In agriculture, can tacit knowledge become explicit to create actions towards sustainability within the circuit of planting–harvesting–first disposal of coffee production via knowledge management?

Therefore, to achieve the goal, this research used a qualitative-quantitative approach through the application of the phases of socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization for the conversion of tacit to explicit knowledge, empirically involving the agricultural productive ecosystem within the circuit of planting–harvesting–first disposal of coffee from Guerrero, Mexico, adding the catalogue of sustainability criteria for small producers, integrating and establishing social, economic, and environmental actions, and measuring from a statistical analysis. Findings indicated that it is possible to convert tacit knowledge explicitly to make tangible actions towards sustainability within the circuit of coffee production, and it is also possible to integrate, measure, and identify sustainable conjectures statistically. The details are in the following structure: Section 2 proposes a theoretical framework regarding sustainability and knowledge management, including tacit and explicit knowledge in agriculture and coffee production. Section 3 records the hypothesis. Section 4 details the materials and methods of the study. Section 5 presents the qualitative and quantitative results, including the priorities for sustainability. Section 6 displays the discussion, and Section 7 shows the conclusions and implications for upcoming research.

2. Theoretical Framework

2.1. Sustainability in the Public and Private Sectors via Knowledge Management

Social, economic, and environmental improvement depends on knowledge [36,37], which is defined as the information, understanding, and skills you gain through education or experience [38]. Knowledge has been an intangible pillar for the development of human beings in the past and is now also the basis for the future. From our first bipedal ancestor, “Lucy,” who tried to adapt to their environment by applying their knowledge empirically 4 Ma ago, until today, in which the environmental, economic, and social situation is worrying, human beings are called to create new knowledge to satisfy their current needs without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs [6,39].

The formal establishment of the term sustainability is relatively new. The official starting point for sustainable social, economic, and environmental development could be established with the installation of the Brundtland Commission in 1987, defined as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs, followed by the adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in 2015 [5,6], while the knowledge management paradigm appeared in the same year, becoming public at a conference in Boston by Davenport in 1993, defining it as the capture, distribution, and effective use of knowledge [40,41]. This leaves a short period of 34 years on average for the intersection of the sustainable elements with the theory for managing, while for the SDGs, just 9 years.

In this sense, many studies have been developed in the public and private sectors, using the knowledge management paradigm for achieving sustainability during this period. For example, Ref. [42] uses knowledge acquisition to gain and enhance internal knowledge from stakeholders and knowledge application, utilizing and sharing external information to improve the processes engaging people in Chinese manufacturing firms to achieve sustainable organizational performance, particularly operational performance. Ref. [43] studied the knowledge management process, considering the acquisition, dissemination, and application of knowledge through technologies involving people from manufacturing corporations in Pakistan to develop environmentally and economically sustainable practices. Ref. [44] employs knowledge management through variables such as organizational goal, efficiency of work, production processes, use and practice, and necessary knowledge to work involving experts, government, and academics for textile sustainability in Thailand. Ref. [45] exposed employees’ knowledge sharing in deposit-taking services and credit cooperative societies using internet resources from Kenya to get a sustainable advantage. Ref. [46] considered the acquisition, integration, and application of knowledge through technologies to achieve lean sustainability in companies in China.

In public, Ref. [47] focuses on knowledge storage through information and communication technologies as an intranet and document management system, including experts and teachers, for the sustainable development of general education schools in Lithuania. Ref. [48] studied knowledge management in four dimensions: technical, cultural, human, and structural, involving people from Malaysian public universities for career sustainability. Ref. [49] indicated that education is the key to achieving sustainable development and making the world a better place. This is in the line of knowledge sharing, application, and access as parts of knowledge management methodology for students from Saudi Arabia. Ref. [50], driving knowledge management through perceptions of knowledge management synthesis, dissemination, collaboration, means of knowledge management, and leadership, as well as studying the sustainability of hospital and healthcare organizations involving employees and health professionals.

For the above, it is appreciated that the knowledge is issued by people, moving to the organization involving technological elements (in some cases), and ending in the person who receives the knowledge. This process bases its success on the assumption that the organization, technology, and people manage knowledge organically and affordably within a controlled social, economic, and environmental context within the organization. A similar sequence was proposed initially by [51]; however, based on [52], it appears to be a more complex and complicated task, even more so in countries like Mexico in regions like Guerrero, which presents the most significant social, economic, and environmental disadvantages that go from the lack of access to food for 33.3% of people; 65.6% of its inhabitants living in poverty; or the presence of pests and diseases in what is its most extensive economic activity, estimating losses between 30 and 50%, damaging the planting–harvesting–first sale circuit of the local agricultural communities [53,54].

The above reflects different realities in which knowledge management may be natural and approachable for some but unusual and inaccessible for others, in which people’s social, economic, and environmental situation could be a significant barrier. For this reason, knowledge per se is the most affordable way to achieve sustainability in the agricultural sector. Possibly, for these reasons, IICA and FAO have spoken out in favor of knowledge management for the development and launch of innovations that promote sustainability [55,56].

This study aligns with [9] in recognizing efforts to achieve sustainability. However, only a few studies manage knowledge, considering the environmental, economic, and social dimensions as part of the integral dynamics of a system. This study’s first contribution is to bring knowledge management closer to the social, economic, and environmental dimensions as integral elements of the planting–harvest–first disposal circuit of agricultural coffee production in Guerrero, Mexico, to formulate actions that impact their sustainability.

2.2. Tacit and Explicit Knowledge for the Sustainability of Agriculture’s Coffee Production

Agriculture, a possessor of vast knowledge, know-how, skills, and practices defined as traditional knowledge [24], has been the precursor activity of the first tools used by man, even technological ones, by applying its tacit knowledge reservoir and making it explicit by establishing tangible elements based on theoretical aspects [57]. From its beginnings, agricultural activity has been characterized by its development in an artisanal way, under hand-made work, transmitting this traditional knowledge from father to son since the year 12,500 B.C., and today it is a vital element for achieving sustainability [25,26].

The most representative methodologies that handle tacit and explicit knowledge focus on creating, extracting, and transmitting knowledge based on their employees. For example, Ref. [58] exposes how to extract and balance tacit and explicit knowledge using analogies in organizations. Ref. [59] touches on tacit knowledge as a process in R&D organizations, including employees and team leaders to manage it. Ref. [60] exposes the spiral model of socializing, externalizing, combining, and internalizing to go from tacit to explicit knowledge for creating new knowledge, also using analogies, in an organizational context.

These theoretical models have been the basis for new research in sectors such as agriculture, involving sustainability in some of its dimensions. For example, Ref. [29] employs analogy as a knowledge management technique to improve the coffee process and local economy, including producers from the mountain region in Guerrero, Mexico. Ref. [61] applies the socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization models for knowledge creation to quantify the interaction between producers, detect barriers, and propose sustainable strategies with a focus on the environment and economy within the agave-mezcal process in Oaxaca, Mexico. Ref. [62] analyzed knowledge management as a tool, specifically knowledge transfer, to provide information for sustainable social welfare linking small and medium agricultural producers from Italy. Ref. [63] used roadmapping for knowledge creation to develop sustainable environmental practices for coffee production, including small producers from Chiapas, Mexico. Ref. [64], through the knowledge management paradigm, involves Pakistan’s food sector experts in searching for healthy products via a sustainable supply chain.

This study recognizes the efforts made to strengthen traditional knowledge by socializing it as an empirical expression contributing to science and technology [65] in the face of significant global challenges; however, it is vital to understand it from its knowledge, experiences, and practices, conjoining social, economic, and environmental integration towards sustainability.

Traditional knowledge, being tacitly based, is difficult to obtain [14]. Nevertheless, in some cases, it is possible to communicate it and make it explicit through models [66], as could be explored previously. Therefore, based on the concept of knowledge creation established as the act of making knowledge available to individuals, expanding it in the social context, and connecting it with existing knowledge [33] to our knowledge, there is no practical model that makes communication possible for tacit-explicit conversion under an approach that manages and analyzes social, economic, and environmental sustainability actions integrally and that has been applied preferably within the agricultural context in Mexico.

Without an applicable model, this study adopts the socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization model, which has been validated in the agricultural context of Mexico but takes into account the respective reservations.

2.3. Social, Economic, and Environmental Correlation in Coffee Context

As the backbone of Mexico’s economic and social development, coffee production involves more than 500 thousand men and women farmers, indigenous people, and peasants’ people in its productive system, established in an area of more than 700 thousand hectares, producing more than 1 million tons during 2022. Nonetheless, despite being one of the principal countries in making conventional and organic coffee, in the real world, the social, economic, and environmental vicissitudes in Guerrero have been present in each region for a long time. For example, regarding compliance with environmental regulations by sector, 69.3% of economic units dedicated to agriculture do not comply with the standard; some zones have marketing companies and the production of specialty coffee, which facilitates sales and strengthens the economy of producers, while socially, the state is immersed in a problem of public insecurity for its inhabitants [67,68,69]. It is possible that, due to the above, local government agencies such as the Ministry of Environment and Natural Resources have the mission of “searching for integration between social, economic, and natural elements that ensure optimal use, conservation, and protection of the natural resources of the state, thus forming a comprehensive and participatory environmental policy for sustainable development” [70].

In the literature, this is reinforced by [71], who returns to the study of coffee production in Mexico, relating similar forms of organic practices to sustainable systems with an emphasis on (environmental) production, leaving social aspects at a minimum level. Ref. [72] presents a descriptive statistical analysis of organic and conventional production in Lima, Peru, finding a minor emphasis on the social aspect within the sustainable dimensions (environmental, economic, and social). Ref. [73] estimates the sustainability level, finding high social and low economic and environmental levels in coffee production in El Salvador. Ref. [74] exposes the vicissitudes in the statistical correlations within various environmental and economic indicators, exemplifying a negative result between tree diversity and price, while productivity and cost are highly correlated.

Due to the above, it is reasonable to argue for a heterogeneous emphasis between the social, economic, and environmental dimensions surrounding coffee’s agricultural production in Guerrero. Therefore, based on the criticism made of social, economic, and environmental dimensions, in which the weight of its components is not described [75], this study combines and measures the sustainable dimensions within the planting–harvesting–first disposal circuit of coffee production in Guerrero, Mexico.

As in much literature, it is necessary to combine traditional and scientific knowledge, integrating and measuring the social, economic, and environmental dimensions as a whole. Therefore, the present study addresses the following hypotheses.

3. Hypothesis Development

Therefore, due to the complex social, economic, and environmental situation in coffee-producing areas, the first hypothesis is raised as follows:

H₁: 

The producer’s context’s social, economic, and environmental elements allow them to propose variables and actions with sustainable impact into the planting–harvest–first disposal circuit of coffee in Guerrero, Mexico.

In the absence of a model that includes the conversion of tacit to explicit knowledge, integrating the social, economic, and environmental dimensions as a whole, and that has been validated in the agricultural context of Mexico, the second hypothesis is as follows:

H₂: 

Using the socialization, externalization, combination, and interiorization model can be a knowledge management practice that converts tacit to explicit knowledge to create tangible actions towards the environmental, economic, and social sustainability of the agricultural circuit of planting, harvesting, and first disposal of coffee production.

Given the need to comprehensively measure the social, economic, and environmental dimensions, the third hypothesis formulated is as follows:

H₃: 

The social, economic, and environmental dimensions around the planting–harvesting–first disposal circuit of coffee production in Guerrero, Mexico, are unbalanced.

The hypothesis will be tested using the following materials and methods.

4. Materials and Methods

4.1. Study Design and Data Collection

The present study was carried out with the interaction of 55 members of the coffee productive ecosystem, such as small-scale indigenous and peasant producers, members of local organizations, academic researchers, marketing intermediaries, and government representatives from the regions of Costa Grande, Montaña, Costa Chica, and Centro in Guerrero, Mexico. These areas involve more than 20,000 producers, producing 38,000 tons on 45,000 hectares in 20 municipalities [76,77].

Based on the concept of knowledge creation, defined as the act of making available the knowledge created by individuals, amplifying it in social context, and selectively connecting it with existing knowledge [33], and supported by [58,60] theories, the spiral of tacit to explicit knowledge was a pattern under the sequence of four phases: (1) tacit to tacit, “knowledge socialization”; (2) tacit to explicit, “knowledge externalization”; (3) explicit to explicit, “knowledge combination”; and (4) explicit to tacit, “knowledge internalization”. For this and to follow the objectives and approach of the study, socialization, externalization, combining, and internalizing knowledge of the coffee ecosystem was applied as a knowledge management methodology combining the catalogues of [78,79], which was used to evaluate the proportion of sustainable agriculture practiced and facilitated towards the sustainability of the circuit planting–harvesting–first sale of coffee. Because agriculture is vital for sustainable development [80,81], the application was in two phases:

The first phase was concerned with the conversion of tacit to explicit knowledge through the socialization, externalization, combination, and interiorization models:

• In socialization, each member of the coffee productive ecosystem shares their knowledge, experiences, and practices. The focus is on the following: What knowledge, experiences, and sustainable practices do the elements of the coffee productive ecosystem share?
• For externalization, the group began to document the knowledge, experiences, and practices, focusing on whether the knowledge, experiences, and sustainable practices are documented and derived from the interaction between the productive coffee ecosystem.
• In combination, the groups documented knowledge, experiences, and practices to share with the coffee ecosystem and refine them (if required) to generate new explicit knowledge. The focus was on whether documented knowledge, experiences, and sustainable practices expressed by the coffee production ecosystem needed to be refined.
• For internalization, the coffee ecosystem shared new knowledge, experiences, and practices explicitly so that they could be internalized. Therefore, the question was: Are the latest knowledge, experiences, and sustainable practices accepted by the coffee production ecosystem?

This study includes the producer’s social, economic, and environmental data context in parallel. To carry out in-depth research and, under the objectives and hypotheses to trigger the interaction of tacit and explicit knowledge concerning the contextual factors, the question was: What are the problems and needs of the coffee circuit? About the productive ecosystem, what actions should state agencies take to meet the needs of the coffee circuit? As for the effects, what actions should be taken to improve the coffee circuit? Following the recommendations of [58], the use of tacit and explicit knowledge in practice must respond to change, to unpredictable knowledge, and to creating knowledge.

Second phase: For determining environmental, economic, and social conjunctures for the sustainability of the coffee circuit in Guerrero, the relevance and measurement variables were followed, classifying and interrelating the 11 criteria’s catalogue [79] against the socialization, externalization, combination, and interiorization layers [60] obtained from the interaction of the coffee productive ecosystem, formalizing the questions as follows:

• In the environmental sphere, were risks of contamination, biodiversity, and endangerment derived from pesticides, water use, and soil health contemplated?
• For economic resilience, were profitability and land productivity considered?

In social terms, land tenure, decent employment, and food security are expressed by the coffee production ecosystem (see Figure 1).

Because coffee production is hand-made, the SECI model was characterized by on-site visits and workshop development from 2017–2019. In both, six worktables were formed involving groups of producers, coffee organizations, government representatives, and researchers from various institutions. Initially, the first four were carried out in situ through the Secretariat of Indigenous Affairs and Afro-Mexican Communities, the product system, local organizations, and coffee producers to enter the coffee-growing areas. This was done due to the insecurity registered in the region. The remaining two are carried out in the facilities of what is today known as CEIBAAS (Center for Studies and Research in Bioculture, Agroeconology, Environment, and Health), dependent on the National Council of Humanities, Science, and Technology (CONAHCyT), which focuses on solving the most common problems in the regions.

Before starting the study, the coffee ecosystem knew the objective and asked if they would participate. If they agreed, they were asked to remain in place; however, they could leave at any time if they did not want to participate. This position considers the political constitution of the United Mexican States, specifically Article Two, which is related to the autonomy of communities in deciding their forms of organization [82].

4.2. Reliability, Validity, and Analysis

The socialization, externalization, combination, and interiorization model is one of the most representative management patterns to convert tacit to explicit knowledge and has already been applied in the agricultural context. Although it has a quantitative approach under the term sustainability [61,83], it is currently pertinent to verify its application from qualitative research that delves into the knowledge, experiences, and practices of the coffee production ecosystem, together with the statistical analysis and isolation of variables to manage actions for social, economic, and environmental improvement, following the structure of [84,85].

The responses were analyzed, ordered, and categorized according to social, economic, and environmental sustainability dimensions [78,79]. Statistical analysis followed this to evaluate correlations based on the recommendations of the Oslo Manual 2018 [86] and the social, economic, and environmental data context of producers and technological requirements.

The practical application of the socialization, externalization, combination, and internalization model, the conjunction of the criteria within the environmental, economic, and social dimensions, in addition to the statistical test, will help to conclude whether the results obtained agree or not with the management and integration of knowledge management theory/sustainability dimensions (conformity hypothesis H₁, H₂), and if they can be integrated and measured with the same theoretical population within the sustainability criteria through statistical testing (homogeneity/independence hypothesis H₃), following what is established by [87].

5. Results

5.1. Social, Economic, and Environmental Context of Agriculture Coffee Production in Guerrero, Mexico

Guerrero, located under the coordinates north 18°53′16″, south 16°18′57″ of north latitude; to the east 98°00′26″, to the west 102°11′04″ west longitude, presents significant social, economic, and environmental vicissitudes within its different coffee-producing regions as Costa Grande, Costa Chica, Centro, and Montaña.

In the municipalities of Costa Grande, the most representative are the following:

• Atoyac de Álvarez, lat 17°12′46″, long 100°25′59″, m.a.s.l. 40, with 60,680 inhabitants, has an education level of 8.4 years, a poverty level of 52.9%, and 56.2% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Damage is recorded due to natural phenomena such as cyclones, floods, and wind injuries.
• Coyuca de Benitez, lat 17°00′32″, long 100°05′22″, m.a.s.l. 13, has 73,056 inhabitants, an education level of 8.1 years, a poverty level of 65.5%, and 67.9% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. There is damage due to forest fires.
• Zihuatanejo de Azueta, lat 17°39′02″, long 101°32′53″, m.a.s.l. 9, with 126,001 inhabitants, has a level of education of 9.3 years, a poverty level of 45.9%, and 53.1% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Also, there is damage due to forest fires.
• Petatlán, lat 17°32′18″, long 101°16′28″, m.a.s.l. 28, with 44,583 inhabitants, has an education level of 8.0 years, a poverty level of 55.0%, and 59.3% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Cyclones, floods, earthquakes, and forest fires have caused damage.
• Técpan de Galeana, lat 17°13′21″, long 100°37′57″, m.a.s.l. 23, with 65,237 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.9 years, a poverty level of 37.8%, and 38.7% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage caused by hail.
• La Unión San Isidoro Montes de Oca, lat 17°58′56″, long 101°48′20″, m.a.s.l. 47, with 26,349 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.1 years, a poverty level of 43.5%, and 46.1% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. It refers to drought damage.

In the municipalities of Costa Chica, the most representative are the following:

• Ayutla de Los Libres, lat 16°57′55″, long 99°05′51″, m.a.s.l. 379, with 69,123 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.2 years, a poverty level of 75.9%, and 76.7% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. There is damage due to the tremor.
• Igualapa, lat 16°44′37″, long 98°28′36″, with 11,739 inhabitants, m.a.s.l. 481, has a level of education of 7.3 years, a poverty level of 76.1%, and 77.2% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Damage due to cyclones and floods is recorded.
• Ometepec, lat 16°41′06″, long 98°24′16″, m.a.s.l. 323, with 68,207 inhabitants, has an education level of 8.4 years, a poverty level of 68.2%, and 69.2% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Cyclones, earthquakes, and forest fires cause damage.
• San Luis Acatlán, lat 16°48′31″, long 98°44′01″, m.a.s.l. 280, with 46,270 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.2 years, a poverty level of 86.0%, and 86.3% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage caused by cyclones, floods, earthquakes, and forest fires.
• Tlacoachistlahuaca, lat 16°48′36″, long 98°18′06″, m.a.s.l. 401, with 22,781 inhabitants, has a level of education of 5.0 years, a poverty level of 83.1%, and 83.4% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Earthquakes and forest fires caused damage.

In the municipalities of Centro, the most representative are the following:

• Chilapa de Álvarez, lat 17°35′39″, long 99°10′40″, m.a.s.l. 1,406, with 123,722 inhabitants, has a level of education of 6.6 years, a poverty level of 75.2%, and 77.3% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. There is damage due to the drought.
• Chilpancingo de los Bravo, lat 17° 33′06″, long 99° 30′04″, m.a.s.l. 1,257, with 283,354 inhabitants, has a level of education of 10.7 years, a poverty level of 55.5%, and 59.7% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Damage from floods and forest fires was reported.
• José Joaquín Herrera, lat 17°26′55″, long 99°01′28″, m.a.s.l. 1,644, with 18,381 inhabitants, has a level of education of 5.2 years, a poverty level of 95.0%, and 95.0% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—no damage reported due to natural phenomena.

In the municipalities of the Montaña, the most representative are the following:

• Malinaltepec, lat 17°14′41″, long 98°40′16″, m.a.s.l. 1,532, with 29,625 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.8 years, a poverty level of 88.5%, and 88.6% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage from cyclones and earthquakes.
• Metlatónoc, lat 17°11′43″, long 98°24′26″, m.a.s.l. 2,020, with 18,859 inhabitants, has a level of education of 4.9 years, a poverty level of 97.7%, and 98.0% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage from cyclones, earthquakes, forest fires and frost.
• Tlacoapa, lat 17°15′36″, long 98°44′54″, m.a.s.l. 1,386, with 10,092 inhabitants, has a level of education of 7.0 years, a poverty level of 92.0%, and 92.3% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage from earthquakes and floods.
• Acatepec, lat 17°19′31″, long 98°54′37″, m.a.s.l. 1,743, with 40,197 inhabitants, has a level of education of 6.6 years, a poverty level of 96.0%, and 96.1% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month—damage from cyclones and frost.
• Iliatenco, lat 17°02′44″, long 98°41′09″, m.a.s.l. 1,023, with 11,679 inhabitants, has a level of education of 8.5 years, a poverty level of 80.2%, and 80.4% of families of four live with less than USD 778.9 per month. Damage from cyclones and frost [53,88,89] (Figure 2).

The above summarizes that the region with the most social and economic limitations is the Montaña, with 7 years of schooling, 90.9% of people in poverty, and 91.1% with income less than USD 778.9 per family per month. The Costa Chica region follows with 7 years, 77.9% and 78.6%; Centro with 7.5 years, 75.2% and 77.3%; and Costa Grande with 8.1 years, 50.1% and 53.6%, respectively (see

Table 1. Social, economic, and environmental context of agriculture coffee production. Elaborated with Microsoft Office Professional Plus 2016.

Region	Education (Years)	Poverty (%)	Poverty by Income (%)
Costa Grande	8.4	52.9	56.2
	8.1	65.5	67.9
	9.3	45.9	53.1
	8	55	59.3
	7.9	37.8	38.7
	7.1	43.5	46.1
Average	8.1	50.1	53.6
Costa Chica	7.2	75.9	76.7
	7.3	76.1	77.2
	8.4	68.2	69.2
	7.2	86	86.3
	5	83.1	83.4
Average	7.0	77.9	78.6
Centro	6.6	75.2	77.3
	10.7	55.5	59.7
	5.2	95	95
Average	7.5	75.2	77.3
Montaña	7.8	88.5	88.6
	4.9	97.7	98
	7	92	92.3
	6.6	96	96.1
	8.5	80.2	80.4
Average	7.0	90.9	91.1

). The most common damage caused by natural phenomena are cyclones, floods, and forest fires. These results show that schooling is higher than that registered in coffee-growing areas of Costa Rica at 5 and 6 years; conditions of high and very high marginalization; and a per capita income of 416 to 13 860 per harvest [90]. The cyclones and floods align with the report by [91] that these natural phenomena in this region will affect the phenological phases, the yield and quality of the grain, and a high spread of pests in the area.

5.2. Social, Economic, and Environmental Actions

Despite the social, economic, and environmental situation in which the coffee-producing areas in Guerrero, Mexico, are located, many actions have been determined within the planting–harvest–first disposal circuit for the cultivation of the grains as follows:

The environmental dimension includes the following:

• Biodiversity: the creation of on-site seed banks in different regions (as most commonly spoken), followed by a coffee plantation renewal program, plant genetic lines by region, knowledge about pest-resistant plant varieties, experimentation with varieties at different heights, research on drought-resistant plant varieties, certified seeds, and shade-growing programs.
• Endanger derived from pesticides: biological pest control and agroecological management of rust and borer.
• Risk contamination: studies of the coffee plant’s agroecological conditions and the crop’s area characterization.
• Water use: in vitro crop.
• Soil health: soil analysis. (Figure 3).

As an environmental action, the seed bank is currently an established strategy in other countries. For example, the producers from Costa Rica, through the Centro Agrónomico Tropical de Investigación y Enseñanza, safeguarded almost 2000 varieties of coffee and made them available for use. This institution works together with the organization COOPEDOTA, confirmed as one of the most important in the sustainable practice of coffee [92,93]. In the US, it has also been proven as an option. However, it is still necessary to direct and delegate it to the different regions so that the small producer has continuous access to the market, considering their social, economic, and cultural factors (see U.S. National Plant Germplasm System) [94].

The economic dimension includes the following:

• Profitability: training and permanent technical assistance to producers (as most expressed), the establishment of a guaranteed price for coffee, good practice manuals, regional diagnoses by micro-region, standardization and surveillance of the production process, creation of purchase-sale contracts, promotion productive diversification, and formation of an organization for coffee marketing.
• Resilience: access to financing, strategic plan to promote coffee growing in Guerrero, creation of local transforming micro-enterprises, public policies to rescue the coffee sector of Guerrero, creation of a panel of tasters in defense of the quality of Guerrero coffee, development of Mexican regulations for natural coffee, flexibility of operating rules for access to support for small producers, government coffee promotion and procurement program, tax incentives, fewer subsidies, more strategic projects, and creation of guarantee funds for cultivation.
• Land productivity: increase road infrastructure, promote tourism in coffee-growing areas, promote the designation of origin, and offer nutritional packages for coffee according to your situation (Figure 4).

Training and permanent technical assistance to coffee producers have been implemented by the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in Latin American countries for sustainable production by an association called Finca Triunfo Verde in Mexico [95]. This strategy has also been implemented in Ethiopia through the Coffee Training Centre (CTC), which includes advice on quality, roasting, and packing and is used as an incubator for creating new coffee professions [96].

The social dimension includes the following:

• Food security: state network for exchanging experiences and practices between producers, technicians, and researchers (as stated), binding consultation forums, implementation of social programs, creation of a governing body for coffee in the state, creation of a coffee organization and an information dispersion system, incorporation of science and technology organizations, and coffee activity as a matter of state.
• Land tenure: registers of coffee producers, access for women to agrarian rights, and safety in coffee-growing areas.
• Decent employment involves strengthening peasant organizations, avoiding corruption within organizations, and incorporating young and disabled people, women, and older adults through programs (Figure 5).

Creating a state network between coffee producers, technicians, and researchers has been a recurring strategy in Latin America. For example, Union Majomut in Chiapas and Oaxaca, Mexico, is a social organization where other organizations, cooperatives, and people converge to change small coffee producers’ living conditions [97]. Fairtrade International also promotes this sense, connecting producers with consumers and promoting fairer trading conditions to strengthen production and combat poverty in developing countries [98].

5.3. Statistical Model

Based on the sample size of the members of the coffee ecosystem, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov statistical test was applied to evaluate the normality of the distribution [99] of environmental, economic, and social responses. The results show an abnormal distribution (p < 0.05) for environmental and economic, with 0.022 and 0.045, respectively, while for social, it shows a normal with 0.077. These results complicated the decision about the use of parametric or non-parametric tests to examine statistical correlation; however, supported by [100] by establishing that non-parametric tests can be applied to data with a normal distribution or not, and following [101], it was considered the application of the log-linear statistical test to study the association between the set of variables contained in each of the environmental, economic, and social dimensions to examine their correlation, obtaining the following results:

• Validation: Initially, the fit of the model was verified through the residual results (the difference between the observed and expected frequencies). The results show an adjusted and saturated model with 0.000, which means that the interaction of the environmental, economic, and social data sets can be analyzed using a log-linear model. The above follows Pearson’s Chi-square, and the likelihood ratio results in 0.000 for both tests, less than (p < 0.05).
• Correlation: The results of the Pearson’s Chi-square test on the K-way effects show significant results of 0.000 for the environment, 0.001 for the economic, and 1.000 for the social, so it is argued that the environmental and economic dimensions, being below (p < 0.05), have a combination of variables within the log-linear model. This contrasts with the results of the partial associations on the effects of the dimensions, having a significance level greater than >0.05 for the environment with 0.209, in economics with 0.068, and in socials with 0.000, in which 0 is not significant. This visualizes a priority towards the environment and economy, mainly with the presence of cyclones, floods, and forest fires, by affecting the phenological phases of coffee, in addition to the high degree of poverty in which its producers live.
• Model: The above made it necessary to exclude step by step the actions that are not statistically significant p > 0.05 from the model under the backward method. In this sense, the actions that showed effects on the environmental-economic-social correlation were as follows:

  ∘

  Biodiversity (environmental): the creation of on-site seed banks in different regions; profitability (economic): training and permanent technical assistance to producers; and food security (social): a state network for exchanging experiences and practices between producers, technicians, and researchers, with 0.002.

  ∘

  The effects were over 0.05 at the intersection of the remaining environmental-economic, economic-social, environmental, economic, and social actions (

  Table 2. Statistical sustainable management model for coffee production in Guerrero, Mexico. Elaborated with IBM SPSS Statistics v21.

  Validation
  Convergence
  Difference between observed and expected frequencies	0.000
  Goodness-of-fit test
  Likelihood ratio	0.000
  Pearson	0.000
  Correlation
  K-way effects
  Environment	0.000
  Economic	0.001
  Social	1.000
  Partial associations
  Environment	0.209
  Economic	0.068
  Social	0.000
  Model
  Effect
  Environment–Economic–Social (A1)	0.002

  and Figure 6).

The above results argue for the relevance and originality of integrating and measuring the social, economic, and environmental dimensions together, as well as validating the data collection model and actions with an impact on sustainability.

6. Discussion

Achieving a sustainable coffee agricultural ecosystem in Guerrero registers environmental, economic, and social limitations. The disadvantages of educational level, poverty, and income restrictions, in addition to the environmental complications, indicate a complex environment. Despite this, it is possible to manage actions for the sustainability of the planting–harvest–first disposal circuit, for which H₁ is agreed upon and accepted. This aligns with [102] by establishing that it is possible to determine sustainable strategies in limited social and economic contexts from the knowledge of the residents of rural communities that interact with the environment and their natural resources as their main source of income.

In this line, using the socialization, externalization, combination, and interiorization model can be a knowledge management practice that converts tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge to integrate tangible actions towards the social, economic, and environmental sustainability of the planting–harvesting–first disposal circuit within the agricultural sector, specifically coffee production. We also agreed with H₂, and it is accepted. This is in line with [103], who determined that there is an empirical transfer from tacit to explicit knowledge; however, regarding the application of the model, it establishes that it can be applied partially, particularly talking about the internalization, although this must be verified in the implementation of the actions.

Regarding the measure of social, economic, and environmental dimensions around the planting–harvesting–first disposal circuit of coffee production in Guerrero, the results validated the use of the log-linear statistical test, showing a correlation towards the economic with 0.001 and the environmental dimension with 0.000, although not for the social with 1.000. In contrast, the partial associations showed an absence of a relationship with 0.068, 0.209, and 1.00, respectively, forcing the identification of statistically significant actions (p < 0.05), concluding with an association model between the actions of biodiversity (environmental), creation of on-site seed banks in different regions; profitability (economic), training and permanent technical assistance to producers; and food security (social), a state network for exchanging experiences and practices between producers, technicians, and researchers, with 0.002. Therefore, there is homogeneity and dependence, so there are reasons to accept H₃. This result aligns with what [104] mentioned in its final purpose of regenerating the economy, society, and the biosphere through the actions above for coffee. This can be supported by the following:

• The seed banks have been recognized as a sustainable strategy for conserving biodiversity [105];
• The training and permanent technical assistance to producers for economic sustainability are analogous to the actions implemented by the International Coffee Organization to encourage the coffee economy, referring to projects to improve cultivation, processing, storage, transportation, and marketing practices within the planting–harvest–first disposal circuit in Guerrero, Mexico;
• Likewise, creating a state network for exchanging experiences and practices between producers, technicians, and researchers is consonant with the capacity building of institutions also promoted by the International Coffee Organization [106].

Based on the results and being the actions that have been detected and implemented in various parts of the world, the current study can be extrapolated to other agricultural crops around the world in two ways: (1) to serve as a model to transfer tacit to explicit knowledge under a qualitative–quantitative approach using different methodologies; and (2) to detect actions to benefit sustainability based on traditional knowledge.

7. Conclusions

In conclusion, within an adverse social, economic, and environmental context, the municipalities of the Costa Grande, Centro, Montaña, and Costa Chica, dedicated to coffee production, the productive ecosystem of the State of Guerrero, aspire to implement sustainable actions. Therefore, it can be argued that the creation of actions such as seed banks, training, permanent technical assistance, and a state network for exchanging experiences and practices between producers, technicians, and researchers in favor of social, economic, and environmental aspects, combining tacit and explicit knowledge within the agricultural ecosystem, speaking of coffee production in Guerrero, Mexico, can lead to sustainable agriculture management. These actions are valid since they have been statistically proven and have been shared with the coffee ecosystem without any modification, so their acceptance as an initial mechanism for its disposal can be argued; in addition, these have already been implemented by various organizations in other regions of the world.

In this sense, the inclination towards the economic dimension is a priority as it is an important source of income in which the family is often involved and in which resilience, profitability, and productivity are the sequential priorities within the planting–harvesting–first disposal of coffee.

As an economic, environmental, and social model of coffee agricultural activity, the pursuit of profitability, biodiversity, and food security is argued to be the most promising mechanisms to achieve sustainability; however, actions were identified within the aspects of endanger derived from pesticides, risk contamination, soil health, water use, resilience, land productivity, decent employment, and land tenure as sustainability options to put into practice.

The lack of implementation of different sustainable actions can cause a worsening of economic, social, and environmental conditions, which would limit a greater number of research projects and the possibility of achieving sustainable development goals. In this sense, future lines of research can take two directions: the first is to implement actions within the coffee circuit in Mexico, while the second rethinks the final goal of sustainability in terms of promoting well-being while preserving the planet.

According to the Food and Agriculture Organization, knowledge of present and future needs is, per se, the first activity to be economically, socially, and environmentally sustainable in an equitable manner, so this research manages, integrates, and measures the most priority conjectural actions within the coffee circuit of Guerrero, Mexico.

The results of this study should be taken with caution for two main reasons: the first is that it was carried out before the COVID-19 pandemic, and the second is that it is recommended to involve a larger number of people to obtain more excellent acceptance results. However, the actions should be a starting mechanism for the different levels of government, civil organizations, and researchers to extrapolate and implement in the different coffee-growing regions and other crops in Mexico.