Considering the normative, systemic and procedural dimensions in indicator-based sustainability assessments in agriculture

被引:176
作者
Binder, Claudia R. [1 ,2 ]
Feola, Giuseppe [1 ]
Steinberger, Julia K. [1 ,3 ]
机构
[1] Univ Zurich, Dept Geog, CH-8057 Zurich, Switzerland
[2] Graz Univ, Inst Syst Sci Innovat & Sustainabil Res, A-8010 Graz, Austria
[3] Univ Klagenfurt, Inst Social Ecol, Fac Interdisciplinary Studies, A-1070 Vienna, Austria
关键词
Sustainability assessment; Indicator; Agriculture; Sustainability solution space; Systemic; Normative; Procedure; Implementation; SOCIAL MULTICRITERIA EVALUATION; INTEGRATED ASSESSMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT; FOREST MANAGEMENT; MULTIPLE CRITERIA; FARM-LEVEL; FRAMEWORK; DESIGN; REGION; GAP;
D O I
10.1016/j.eiar.2009.06.002
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
This paper develops a framework for evaluating sustainability assessment methods by separately analyzing their normative, systemic and procedural dimensions as suggested by Wiek and Binder [Wiek, A, Binder, C. Solution spaces for decision-making - a sustainability assessment tool for city-regions. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2005, 25: 589-608.]. The framework is then used to characterize indicator-based sustainability assessment methods in agriculture. For a long time, sustainabillity assessment in agriculture has focused mostly on environmental and technical issues, thus neglecting the economic and, above all, the social aspects of sustainability. the multifunctionality of agriculture and the applicability of the results. In response to these shortcomings, several integrative sustainability assessment methods have been developed for the agricultural sector. This paper reviews seven of these that represent the diversity of tools developed in this area. The reviewed assessment methods can be categorized into three types: (i) top-down farm assessment methods; (ii) top-down regional assessment methods with some stakeholder participation; (iii) bottom-up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods with stakeholder participation throughout the process. The results readily show the trade-offs encountered when selecting an assessment method. A clear, standardized, top-down procedure allows for potentially benchmarking and comparing results across regions and sites. However, this comes at the cost of system specificity. As the top-down methods often have low stakeholder involvement, the application and implementation of the results might be difficult. Our analysis suggests that to include the aspects mentioned above in agricultural sustainability assessment, the bottom-up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods are the most suitable ones. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:71 / 81
页数:11
相关论文
共 85 条
  • [1] [Anonymous], THESIS WAGENINGEN U
  • [2] [Anonymous], 2002, SOZIALE DIMENSIONEN
  • [3] [Anonymous], 1999, Indicators for Sustainable Development: Theory, Method, Applications
  • [4] [Anonymous], INTRO SUSTAINABILITY
  • [5] [Anonymous], 1992, UN C ENV DEV NEW YOR
  • [6] [Anonymous], 2001, Transdisciplinarity: joint problem solving among science, technology, and society: an effective way for managing complexity
  • [7] [Anonymous], 2004, ASSESSMENT STATE IMP
  • [8] Audsley E, 1997, AIR3CT942028 SILS RE
  • [9] PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications
    Behzadian, Majid
    Kazemadeh, R. B.
    Albadvi, A.
    Aghdasi, M.
    [J]. EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 2010, 200 (01) : 198 - 215
  • [10] *BELG PUBL PLANN S, 2003, FRAM ASS SUST LEV BE