Rural sustainability assessment using a combination of multi-criteria decision making and factor analysis

Aliloo, Ali Asghar; Dashti, Sharhryar

doi:10.1007/s10668-020-00874-z

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Outcomes were classified as well‐being if the authors referred to terms such as “well‐being,” “quality of life,” or “standard of living” (Darzi‐Naftchali et al, 2020; Hwang et al, 2018; McShane et al, 2013). Outcomes related to long‐term survival or viability were categorized as persistence (Balezentis et al, 2020; Cuervo, 2014; Hooks et al, 2017; Ofosuhene, 2005; Schwarz & McRae Williams, 2009), outcomes based on composite measures of sustainability which could not be reduced to individual components were categorized as general sustainability (Aliloo & Dashti, 2020), while outcomes based on participant perceptions of changes in sustainability were categorized as perceived sustainability (Schwarz & McRae Williams, 2009).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For example, Cuervo (2014) examines how education‐related pressures drive youth outmigration, where outmigration is viewed as a critical factor of rural community sustainability. Another group of studies make use of composite measures related to general sustainability (Ahmad & Afzal, 2021; Parvaneh & Tavakkoli, 2020), as opposed to examining individual variables, or rely on participant perceptions of changes in sustainability (Aliloo & Dashti, 2020; Kazana & Kazaklis, 2009; Zanin et al, 2020) to evaluate rural sustainability outcomes.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Rural sustainability methods, drivers, and outcomes: A systematic review

Nelson

Nguyen

Francois

et al. 2022

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the past three decades, sustainability science has taken on new importance as interest groups investigate better ways to tackle global challenges—environmental degradation, climate change, and human well‐being—that pose risks to communities, particularly in rural areas. Designs for sustainability require empirical evidence of what works and under what human and environmental conditions. Despite the amount of research that exists, the broad variety of research approaches and contexts makes generalizing knowledge about sustainability in rural areas challenging. This work addresses calls to consolidate the field's knowledge about rural sustainability by examining how rural sustainability has been evaluated, identifying drivers of rural sustainability and associated outcome indicators used to operationalize rural sustainability, and determining common trends in how drivers and outcomes are related. We synthesize this diverse literature to identify common themes in evaluation of rural sustainability across disciplines, global regions, and methodological approaches. Our findings indicate many methods have been used to evaluate rural sustainability, that factors derived from the Triple Bottom Line (social, economic, and environmental) are frequently used to operationalize rural sustainability, and that both direct human interventions and underlying socioeconomic drivers of sustainability are routinely examined in the literature. Overall, we find the majority of studies report positive impacts to rural sustainability, suggesting there are many avenues for creating positive change in sustainability in rural areas. However, we also find greater attention to study conceptualization, design and reporting is needed to provide greater confidence in results that inform policy and decision‐making.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Rural sustainability methods, drivers, and outcomes: A systematic review

Nelson

Nguyen

Francois

et al. 2022

Sustainable Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For instance, demand-driven extension services (Ngigi et al, 2016) and farmer-to-farmer training approaches (Lukuyu et al, 2012). Strengthening human capacity is a precondition for improving the sustainability of rural livelihoods for communities that depend on rainfed agriculture as was found for example in Azerbaijan (Aliloo & Dashti, 2021). Despite the existence many avenues to build capacity in Africa including extension, informal education sources like radio, television and mobile phone, Africa's spending on agricultural research and development remains very low, at less than 7% of the gross domestic product, compared to other developing regions in Asia and Latin America (Asenso-Okyere, 2009).…”

Section: Capacity Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

A holistic sustainability assessment of organic (certified and non-certified) and non-organic smallholder farms in Kenya

Kamau

Schader

Biber‐Freudenberger

et al. 2021

Environ Dev Sustain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of organic farm management practices in sub-Saharan Africa could act as a lever for supporting regional sustainable development. In this study, we sought to assess the sustainability performance of organic (certified and non-certified) and non-organic farms in the dry Kajiado County and the wet Murang’a County in Kenya, based on four sustainability dimensions: Good Governance, Environmental Integrity, Economic Resilience and Social Well-Being. We collected household survey data from 400 smallholder farms, which were formally characterized into five types (mixed organic and conventional, certified organic, organic, conventional, and subsistence farms). We used multivariate analysis of variance, linear fixed-effects and general linear models to examine differences in sustainability performance. Model results indicate that all farms lack reliable farm management information and that only limited knowledge, skills and social security exist for farmers and farm workers. Comparison of the five farm types indicates no significant differences in their sustainability performance. Nonetheless, certified organic farms had better sustainability performance than non-certified farms due to higher economic resilience, environmental integrity, better support and training for workers. However, except for avoiding the use of agrochemicals in certified farms, there is relatively little difference in the farm management practices across farm types. Our results also indicate that farms in Murang’a were more sustainable than those in Kajiado due to better regional land-tenure security and conflict resolution mechanisms, soil and water conservation measures, and farm commercial viability. Nonetheless, unlike Kajiado, farms in Murang’a showed a tendency toward poor animal husbandry practices which affects overall animal welfare, limited credit uptake and market involvement. The results of this study can support decision making to identify appropriate interventions for improving sustainability in smallholder farms.

show abstract

“…Moreover, Valchovska and Watts (2016) acknowledge that "community-based rural enterprises have as yet received relatively limited attention in the academic literature, particularly those located within developed economies" (p.3). CRE can contribute to SRD both in developing (McKinley et al, 2019) and developed countries (van der Schoor & Scholtens, 2019), although the approaches differ (Aliloo & Dashti, 2021), with developing economies being more dependent on the support of NGOs (Forkuor & Korah, 2022). Among European countries, CRE initiatives have a long tradition in northern countries such as Germany or Austria, while southern countries such as Spain lag behind (Magnani et al, 2017), mainly due to an unfavorable regulatory framework (Capellán-Pérez et al, 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainable energy transition and circular economy: The heterogeneity of potential investors in rural community renewable energy projects

Castro

López‐Cabarcos

Viña

et al. 2023

Environ Dev Sustain

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Community renewable energy has been acknowledged as a necessary step in the transition toward a sustainable energy system. It can contribute to the achievement of energy autonomy by communities. In rural settings, it can be a driver of sustainable rural development. And it can be seen as a specific contribution to circular economy from the energy sector. The willingness to invest in community renewable energy has received some attention in previous research but needs further investigation at the local rural scale through quantitative approaches. Based on a survey in a small Galician village, this study contributes to the filling of this gap. The willingness to invest of its inhabitants is analyzed in relation to alternative financial, sociodemographic and sociopsychological features. Survey results show the heterogeneity of individual attitudes and concerns that condition the willingness to invest in rural community renewable energy and the different perceptions of risk and return related to these projects. Cluster analysis allows identifying four different investor profiles (skeptics, financial illiterate, enthusiasts, yield investors). These should be accounted for by project promoters and policymakers when designing incentives and strategies to foster community renewable energy in rural settings.

show abstract

Rural sustainability assessment using a combination of multi-criteria decision making and factor analysis

Cited by 5 publications

References 29 publications

Rural sustainability methods, drivers, and outcomes: A systematic review

Rural sustainability methods, drivers, and outcomes: A systematic review

A holistic sustainability assessment of organic (certified and non-certified) and non-organic smallholder farms in Kenya

Sustainable energy transition and circular economy: The heterogeneity of potential investors in rural community renewable energy projects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About