4.7 Article

Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators

Journal

ECOLOGICAL ECONOMICS
Volume 69, Issue 5, Pages 1062-1075

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.11.027

Keywords

Sustainability indices; Rain-fed agriculture; Irrigated agriculture; Castilla y Leon; Spain

Funding

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation [AGL2006-05587-004-01, AGL2009-12553-C02-02]
  2. Regional Government of Castilla y Leon [VA036A08]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The aim of this study was to develop a practical methodology for evaluating the sustainability of farms by means of composite indicators, and to apply it to two agricultural systems, the rain-fed agriculture of the Castilla y Leon countryside and the irrigated systems of the valley of the River Duero We hope thus to operationalise the concept of sustainability as an element to support the governance of this sector. Our methodology is based on calculating 16 sustainability indicators that cover the three components of the concept (economic, social and environmental), and their subsequent aggregation Into nine different types of sustainability indices Our results enable us first to demonstrate the advantages and disadvantages of the various methods used to construct composite sustainability indicators, demonstrating the usefulness of analysing several of these indicators in conjunction, in order to obtain more robust results They also enable us to visualise farm heterogeneity within a single agricultural system with respect to sustainability as well as to analyse the structural and decision-oriented variables that influence it. Such information could help to improve current agricultural policies (such as income policy, agricultural structure policy and rural development policy), with the aim of improving the sustainability of the sector. (C) 2009 Elsevier B V. All rights reserved

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available