## 3 Material and Methods
### HMP-Coffee Model
#### 3.2.2 Hierarchical-Multicriteria Phase
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c} \hline \hline
**Id** & **Basic Attributes** & \multicolumn{2}{c}{**Qualitative Scale**} & **Unit** \\ \hline  & & **Low time** & **Average time** & **High time** & \\ \hline t1 & Time spent on fertilization & \textless{}98.7 & 98.7–99.25 & 99.25–99.8 & \\ \hline t2 & Time spent on renovation & \textless{}6.8 & 6.8–8.6 & 8.6–10.4 & \\ \hline t3 & Time spent on weed/pest and & & & & \\  & diseases control & \textless{}129.4 & 129.4–143.2 & 143.2–157 & \\ \hline  & & **Cheap** & **Average** & **Expensive** & \\ \hline t4 & Price of workforce & 680.24–895.93 & 895.93–1111.62 & 1111.62–1327.31 & CRC \\ \hline  & & **Low cost** & **Moderate cost** & **High cost** & \\ \hline t5 & Chemical fertilizers & 4597.43–6500 & 6500–9500 & 8817.09–11630.21 & \\ \hline t6 & Organic fertilizers & 1321.56–1793.25 & 1793.25–2736.63 & 2736.63–3308.32 & CRC \\ \hline t7 & Weeds supplies & 1089–1569.87 & 1569.87–2050.14 & 2050.14–2530.71 & \\ \hline t8 & Renovation supplies & 377.917–844.197 & 844.197–1310.47 & 1310.47–1776.746 & \\ \hline  & & **Low expenses** & **Moderate expenses** & **High expenses** & \\ \hline t9 & Maintenance & 5060.26–6976.353 & 6976.353–8892.447 & 8892.447–10808.54 & CRC \\ \hline t10 & Transportation expenses & 459.916–1063.037 & 1063.037–2269.279 & 2269.279–2872.4 & \\  & **Cheap** & **Average** & **Expensive** & \\ \hline t11 & Payment for coffee harvesting & 13609.39–16802.9 & 16802.9–19996.41 & 19996.41–23189.92 & CRC \\ \hline  & & **Low investment** & **Moderate investment** & **High investment** & \\ \hline t12 & Implements for coffee pickers & 65.25–86 & 86–87 & \textgreater{}87–107.049 & \\ \hline t13 & Benefice coffee process & 5512.327– & 6895.7711–8279.05 & 8279.05–9662.389 & CRC \\ \hline t14 & Thresh coffee process & 2000.828–2446.986 & 2446.986–2893.145 & 2893.145–3339.303 & \\  & **Favorable** & **Moderate** & **Unfavorable** & \\ \hline t15 & USD price & 557.303–585.65 & 528.957–557.303 & 500.61–528.957 & USD \\ \hline t16 & The coffee price in the New York & 183.07–255.16 & 147.025–183.07 & 110.98–147.025 & \\  & Stock Exchange & & **High production** & **Average production** & **Low production** & \\ \hline t17 & Coffee production volume & \textless{}24.4 & \textgreater{}24.4–37.4 & \textgreater{}37.4 & Bsh/ha \\ \hline  & & **Favorable** & **Average** & **Unfavorable** & \\ \hline vo & Level of profitability & \textgreater{}1.4 & 1 \(\leq\) Pr \textless{}1.4 & \textless{}1 & \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 4: Scales definition for the set of HPM-Coffee basic attributes. Grey cells: qualitative scales defined by the panel of experts to HPM-Coffee. White cells: meaning by qualitative value (i.e., ranges) determined by a group of local coffee growers with the respective unit. encompasses the economic model of ten small coffee farms of the Cafiambiente Association [39]. The association operates under the Principles and Criteria of the Standard for Sustainable Agriculture RAS [40], promoting healthy practices to achieve sustainability in small coffee crops. In particular, we defined the weight for each basic and aggregate attribute (in total 23 attributes) by calculating the corresponding average relevance (i.e., a partial percentage) concerning total profitability (i.e., total percentage of 100%). For instance, in the period 2010-2019, the average investment in payment for coffee harvesting (i.e., basic attribute t11) was USD 4.250 per year. This value represented 99% of the total investment in the harvest (i.e., aggregate attribute t22) and 33% of the total production cost (i.e., a global variable gv1). The production cost impacted 60% of the total profitability (i.e., objective variable vo). Table 5 summarizes the weights for all basic and aggregate attributes. Note as the sum of the weights is 100% within each aggregate attribute. The sum of the aggregate attributes' weights is 100% to obtain the objective variable. **In the rule's generation step**, we used the concepts of utility functions and weights supplied by DEXI [19].