Multilevel and Multi-user Sustainability Assessment of Farming Systems

Passel, Steven Van; Meul, Marijke

doi:10.1007/978-94-007-5003-6_6

Cited by 16 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 68 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A detailed description of the development, validation, and application of MOTIFS is provided by Meul et al (2008Meul et al ( , 2009De Mey et al (2011), andMeul (2012). Ecological performance of the farms was evaluated by their energy and nutrient use, economic performance by their productivity and profitability, and social performance was measured through labor efficiency and animal welfare.…”

Section: Sustainability Themes and Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Higher sustainability performance of intensive grazing versus zero-grazing dairy systems

Meul

Passel

Fremaut

et al. 2012

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although grazing of dairy cows is an integral part of dairy farming in many European countries, farmers today more often choose for zero-grazing systems, where cows are housed throughout the year. Some studies already compared grazing and zero-grazing systems for specific issues such as labor efficiency, environmental impact, or animal welfare. In our study, we perform a more integrated evaluation, considering relevant ecological, economic, and social aspects. This allows for a balanced and more complete comparison of the sustainability performance of the two production methods. We evaluated ten intensive grazing and ten zero-grazing specialized Flemish dairy farms on the use of nutrients and energy, productivity and profitability, labor input, and animal welfare. In addition, we put special effort in formulating useful management advice for farmers. Therefore, we combined a detailed analysis of the sustainability indicators with an intensive interaction and discussion with farmers and farm advisors. Results show that, on average, the zero-grazing farms performed significantly worse from an ecological and economic point of view. This fact is explained mainly due to a less efficient use of concentrates and byproducts. Social sustainability performance did not differ significantly between the two groups. As a result, the integrated sustainability performance was significantly lower for the zero-grazing group. This finding shows that a further shift from intensive grazing to zero-grazing can move dairy farming in Flanders further away from sustainability. An important advice to improve the ecological and economic performance of zero-grazing farms is to optimize cows' rations to include more forages and optimize forage production and use. More detailed site-and case-specific management advice for farmers of both groups was provided during a discussion meeting. We consider this an essential additional step to any sustainability evaluation, since progress can only be made when monitoring results are translated into practical measures.

show abstract

Section: Sustainability Themes and Indicatorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Higher sustainability performance of intensive grazing versus zero-grazing dairy systems

Meul

Passel

Fremaut

et al. 2012

Agron. Sustain. Dev.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Tools as RISE and SAFA only focus on a flexible use of the tool itself by leaving the possibility to choose the indicators during the assessment (Häni et al, 2003;Van Cauwenbergh et al, 2007). We only found Marchand et al (2014) and Van Passel and Meul (2012) who stress the need and importance for a complementary use of different sustainability assessment tools.…”

Section: Opinion Of Several Workhop Participants: "Isn't It Better Tmentioning

confidence: 82%

A framework for guiding sustainability assessment and on-farm strategic decision making

Coteur¹,

Marchand

Debruyne³

et al. 2016

Environmental Impact Assessment Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Responding to future challenges and societal needs, various actions are taken in agriculture to evolve towards more sustainable farming practices. These actionsimply strategic choices and suppose adequate sustainability as-sessments to identify, measure, evaluate and communicate sustainable development. However, literature is scarce on the link between strategic decision making and sustainability assessment. As questions emerge on how,what andwhen tomeasure, the objective of this paper is to construct a framework for guiding sustainability assessment and on-farmstrategic decision making. Qualitative research on own experiences fromthe past and a recentproject revealed four categoriesof actualneeds farmers,advisors andexperts have regarding sustainability assessment: context, flexibility, focus on farm and farmer and communication. These stakeholders' needs are then incorporated into a two-dimensional framework that marries the intrinsic complexity of sustainability as-sessment tools and the time frame of strategic decision making. The framework allows a farmspecificand flex-ible approach leading to harmonized actions towards sustainable farming. As this framework is mainly a procedural instrument to guide the use of sustainability assessment tools within strategic decision making, it fits to incorporate, even guide, future research on sustainability assessment tools themselves and on their adop-tion on farms.

show abstract

“…The latter is recognized and described as one possible concept for decision making in the field of sustainable development. It is widely recognized and applied in several disciplines, such as natural resource management [17], biofuel [18], farming [19], transportation [20], energy and reviews of energy sector applications [21,22], solid waste management [23] or public investment [24]. In [25], over 403 fuzzy MCDM techniques and applications published within two decades were comprehensively assessed and compared.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines

Salzer

Wallbaum

López³

et al. 2016

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper highlights the need for a more inclusive and sustainable development of social housing in rapidly developing countries of Asia, Latin America, and Africa. At the example of the Philippines, a multi-perspective development process for a bamboo-based building system is developed. Sustainability Assessment Criteria are defined through literature review, field observations and interviews with three stakeholder clusters: (1) Builders and users of traditional bamboo houses in the Philippines; (2) Stakeholders involved in using forest products for housing in other countries around the world; and (3) Stakeholders in the field of social housing in the Philippines. Through coding and sorting of data in a qualitative content analysis, 15 sustainability assessment criteria are identified clustered into the dimensions society, ecology, economy, governance, and technology. Guided by the sustainability criteria and four implementation strategies: (A) Research about and (B) Implementation of the building technology; (C) Participation and Capacity Building of Stakeholders; and (D) Sustainable Supply Chains, a strategic roadmap was created naming, in total, 28 action items. Through segmentation of the complex problem into these action items, the paper identifies one-dimensional methods leading to measurable, quantitative endpoints. In this way, qualitative stakeholder data is translated into quantitative methods, forming a pathway for a holistic assessment of the building technologies. A mid-point, multi-criteria, or pareto decision-making method comparing the 28 endpoints of the alternative to currently practiced conventional solutions is suggested as subject for further research. This framework paper is a contribution to how sustainable building practices can become more inclusive, incorporating the building stock of low-income dwellers. It bridges the gap between theoretical approach and practical applications of sustainability and underlines the strength of combining multi-dimensional development with stakeholder participation.

show abstract

Multilevel and Multi-user Sustainability Assessment of Farming Systems

Cited by 16 publications

References 68 publications

Higher sustainability performance of intensive grazing versus zero-grazing dairy systems

Higher sustainability performance of intensive grazing versus zero-grazing dairy systems

A framework for guiding sustainability assessment and on-farm strategic decision making

Sustainability of Social Housing in Asia: A Holistic Multi-Perspective Development Process for Bamboo-Based Construction in the Philippines

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About