Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Stock and Flow Based Framework to Identify Indicators for a Holistic Comparison of Farming Practices

  • Full-Length Research Article
  • Published:
Agricultural Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Traditionally, crop yield has been the main focus of agricultural policies and technological interventions. For designing appropriate agricultural interventions, a holistic set of indicators accounting for the short and long-term benefits and environmental impacts as well as socioeconomic sustainability of farmers is needed. In contrast with existing frameworks for assessing farming practices where the indicators are restricted to a preset attributes, we developed a stock and flow based framework for a systemic identification of both short and long-term indicators. While stock variables inside the system capture the stability and resilience of the system, indicators identified from various dimensions of the biophysical flows across the system–environment boundary capture the desirable outcomes and undesirable impacts. Our framework also aids in selection of appropriate proxy indicators for hard to measure primary indicators by tracing their forward and backward linkages rather than avoiding them due to their complexity.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Andrieu N, Piraux M, Tonneau J-P (2007) Design of sustainability indicators of the production systems in Brazilian semi-arid area by the analysis of biomass flows. Int J Sustain Dev 10(1–2):106–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Astier M, Speelman EN, López-Ridaura S, Masera OR, Gonzalez-Esquivel CE (2011) Sustainability indicators, alternative strategies and trade-offs in peasant agroecosystems: analysing 15 case studies from Latin America. Int J Agric Sustain 9(3):409–422

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bossel H (2000) Assessing viability and sustainability : a systems-based approach for deriving comprehensive indicator sets. Conserv Ecol 5(2):12

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dale VH, Beyeler SC (2001) Challenges in the development and use of ecological indicators. Ecol Indic 1:3–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. European Commission (2001) A framework for indicators for the economic and social dimensions of sustainable agriculture and rural development. Agriculture Directorate-General, Brussels

  6. European Commission (2006) Development of agri-environmental indicators for monitoring the integration of environmental concerns into the common agricultural policy: COM (2006) 508 final. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:52006DC0508&from=EN. Accessed 07 July 2016

  7. FAO (2013) Sustainability assessment of food and agriculture systems. Guidelines version 3.0. Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  8. FAO (2014) Food wastage footprint: full-cost accounting. Food and Agriculture Organization, United Nations, Rome

    Google Scholar 

  9. Gallop G (2003) A systems approach to sustainability and sustainable development. Sustainable Development and Human Settlements Division, Santiago

    Google Scholar 

  10. Girardin P, Bockstaller C, Van der Werf H (1999) Indicators: tools to evaluate the environmental impacts of farming systems. J Sustain Agric 13(4):37–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gómez-Limón JA, Sanchez-Fernandez G (2010) Empirical evaluation of agricultural sustainability using composite indicators. Ecol Econ 69(5):1062–1075

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jahanshahloo GR, Hosseinzadeh Lotfi F, Maddahi R, Jafari Y (2012) Efficiency and benchmarking in the presence of undesirable (bad) outputs: a DEA approach. Int J Appl Math Res 1(2):178–188

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Klinglmair M, Sala S, Brandão M (2014) Assessing resource depletion in LCA: a review of methods and methodological issues. Int J Life Cycle Assess 19(3):580–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kovach J, Petzoldt C, Degni J, Tette J (1992) A method to measure the environmental impact of pesticides. N Y Food Life Sci Bull 139(139):1–8

    Google Scholar 

  15. Li FJ, Dong SC, Li F (2012) A system dynamics model for analyzing the eco-agriculture system with policy recommendations. Ecol Model 227:34–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. López-ridaura S, Masera O, Astier M (2002) Evaluating the sustainability of complex socio-environmental systems. The MESMIS framework. Ecol Indic 2:135–148

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. López-Ridaura S, Van Keulen H, Van Ittersum MK, Leffelaar PA (2005) Multiscale methodological framework to derive criteria and indicators for sustainability evaluation of peasant natural resource management systems. Environ Dev Sustain 7(1):51–69

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Midgley G, Reynolds M (2004) Systems/operational research and sustainable development: towards a new agenda. Sustain Dev 12(2004):56–64

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Mingers J, Rosenhead J (2004) Problem structuring methods in action. Eur J Oper Res 152(3):530–554

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. NAAS India (2011) Carrying capacity of indian agriculture (Policy Paper No. 51). National Academy of Agricultural Sciences, New Delhi

  21. Nathan HSK, Reddy BS (2011) Criteria selection framework for sustainable development indicators. Int J Multicriteria Decis Mak 1(3):257–279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Niemeijer D, de Groot RS (2008) A conceptual framework for selecting environmental indicator sets. Ecol Indic 8(1):14–25

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Pannell DJ, Glenn NA (2000) A framework for the economic evaluation and selection of sustainability indicators in agriculture. Ecol Econ 33:135–149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Planning Commission of India (2002) Tenth five year plan (2002–2007)

  25. Rigby D, Woodhouse P, Young T, Burton M (2001) Constructing a farm level indicator of sustainable agricultural practice. Ecol Econ 39(3):463–478

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rosen R (1991) Life itself: a comprehensive inquiry into the nature, origin, and fabrication of life. Columbia University Press, New York

    Google Scholar 

  27. Rossing WAH, Zander P, Josien E, Groot JCJ, Meyer BC, Knierim A (2007) Integrative modelling approaches for analysis of impact of multifunctional agriculture: a review for France, Germany and The Netherlands. Agric Ecosyst Environ 120:41–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Roy R, Chan NW (2011) An assessment of agricultural sustainability indicators in Bangladesh: review and synthesis. Environmentalist 32(1):99–110

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Ruben R, Moll H, Kuyvenhoven A (1998) Integrating agricultural research and policy analysis: analytical framework and policy application for Bio-economic modelling. Agric Syst 58(3):331–349

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Sharpe A (2004) Literature review of frameworks for macro-indicators. Centre for the study of Living Standards, Ontario

    Google Scholar 

  31. Shi T, Gill R (2005) Developing effective policies for the sustainable development of ecological agriculture in China: the case study of Jinshan County with a systems dynamics model. Ecol Econ 53:223–246

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Sterman JD (2000) Business dynamics: systems thinking and modeling for a complex world. Irwin/McGraw-Hill, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  33. United Nations (2001) Indicators of sustainable development: framework and methodologies. Comm Sustain Dev 3:294

    Google Scholar 

  34. Van Cauwenbergh N, Biala K, Bielders C et al (2007) SAFE—a hierarchical framework for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems. Agric Ecosyst Environ 120(2–4):229–242

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. von Geibler J, Liedtke C, Wallbaum H, Schaller S (2006) Accounting for the social dimension of sustainability: experiences from the biotechnology industry. Bus Strategy Environ 15(5):334–346

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Von Wirén-Lehr S (2001) Sustainability in agriculture—an evaluation of principal goal-oriented concepts to close the gap between theory and practice. Agric Ecosyst Environ 84:115–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Weidema B, Finnveden G, Stewart M (2005) Impacts from resource use—a common position paper. Int J Life Cycle Assess 10(6):382

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wiek A, Binder C (2005) Solution spaces for decision-making—a sustainability assessment tool for city-regions. Environ Impact Assess Rev 25(6):589–608

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Wolstenholme EF (1983) System dynamics: a system methodology or a system modeling technique. Dynamica 9(2):84–90

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This research is supported in parts by Research Grant No 1387/P-234/2014-15 from National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), Mumbai, India, and Teaching fellowship from Ministry of Human Resources Development, Govt. of India. We express our sincere thanks to members of Alliance for Sustainable and Holistic Agriculture (ASHA) and in particular our NGO partners Tribal Health Initiative, Dharmapuri, Tamilnadu; Myrada, HD Kote, Mysore, Karnataka; Chetana Vikas, Wardha, Maharashtra; and Chetna Organic, Bhawanipatna, Odisha; for various inputs and discussions.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centre for Technology Alternatives for Rural Areas (CTARA), Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, Powai, Mumbai, India

    K. M. Siva Muthuprakash & Om P. Damani

Authors
  1. K. M. Siva Muthuprakash
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Om P. Damani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. M. Siva Muthuprakash.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Siva Muthuprakash, K.M., Damani, O.P. A Stock and Flow Based Framework to Identify Indicators for a Holistic Comparison of Farming Practices. Agric Res 6, 248–258 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-017-0266-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40003-017-0266-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation