首页> 外文OA文献 >Normative, systemic and procedural aspects: a review of indicator‐based sustainability assessments in agriculture
【2h】

Normative, systemic and procedural aspects: a review of indicator‐based sustainability assessments in agriculture

机译:规范,系统和程序方面:审查基于指标的农业可持续性评估

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Several methods for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems have been developed. These methods do not fully: (i) take into account the multi‐functionality of agriculture; (ii) include multidimensionality; (iii) utilize and implement the assessment knowledge; and (iv) identify conflicting goals and trade‐offs. This paper reviews seven recently developed multidisciplinary indicator‐based assessment methods with respect to their contribution to these shortcomings. All approaches include (1) normative aspects such as goal setting, (2) systemic aspects such as a specification of scale of analysis, (3) a reproducible structure of the approach. The approaches can be categorized into three typologies. The top‐down farm assessments focus on field or farm assessment. They have a clear procedure for measuring the indicators and assessing the sustainability of the system, which allows for benchmarking across farms. The degree of participation is low, potentially affecting the implementation of the results negatively. The top‐down regional assessment assesses the on‐farm and the regional effects. They include some participation to increase acceptance of the results. However, they miss the analysis of potential trade‐offs. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches focus on a regional scale. Stakeholders are included throughout the whole process assuring the acceptance of the results and increasing the probability of implementation of developed measures. As they include the interaction between the indicators in their system representation, they allow for performing a trade‐off analysis. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches seem to better overcome the four shortcomings mentioned above.
机译:已经开发了几种评估农业系统可持续性的方法。这些方法没有完全:(i)考虑到农业的多功能性; (ii)包括多维性; (iii)利用和实施评估知识; (iv)确定矛盾的目标和权衡。本文就这些不足对这些缺陷的影响进行了综述,对七种最近开发的基于多学科指标的评估方法进行了回顾。所有方法都包括(1)规范性方面,例如目标设定;(2)系统性方面,例如分析规模的规范;(3)方法的可重现结构。这些方法可以分为三种类型。自上而下的农场评估重点是田间评估或农场评估。他们有一个明确的程序来测量指标和评估系统的可持续性,从而可以跨农场进行基准测试。参与程度低,可能会对结果的实施产生负面影响。自上而下的区域评估评估了农场和区域效应。其中包括一些参与,以增加对结果的接受度。但是,他们错过了对潜在权衡的分析。自下而上,一体化的参与式或跨学科方法着重于区域规模。在整个过程中都包括利益相关者,以确保接受结果并增加实施已制定措施的可能性。由于它们将指标之间的交互包括在系统表示中,因此可以进行权衡分析。自下而上,整合的参与式或跨学科方法似乎更好地克服了上述四个缺点。

著录项

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2010
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 {"code":"en","name":"English","id":9}
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号