TY - JOUR
T1 - Ex ante assessment of the sustainability of alternative cropping systems
T2 - Implications for using multi-criteria decision-aid methods. A review
AU - Sadok, Walid
AU - Angevin, Frédérique
AU - Bergez, Jacques Éric
AU - Bockstaller, Christian
AU - Colomb, Bruno
AU - Guichard, Laurence
AU - Reau, Raymond
AU - Doré, Thierry
PY - 2008/1
Y1 - 2008/1
N2 - Sustainability is a holistic and complex multi-dimensional concept encompassing economic, social and environmental issues, and its assessment is a key step in the implementation of sustainable agricultural systems. Realistic assessments of sustainability require: (1) the integration of diverse information concerning economic, social and environmental objectives; and (2) the handling of conflicting aspects of these objectives as a function of the views and opinions of the individuals involved in the assessment process. The assessment of sustainability is therefore increasingly regarded as a typical decision-making problem that could be handled by multi-criteria decision-aid (MCDA) methods. However, the number and variability of MCDA methods are continually increasing, and these methods are not all equally relevant for sustainability assessment. The demands for such approaches are also rapidly changing, and faster ex ante assessment approaches are required, to address scales currently insufficiently dealt with, such as cropping system level. Researchers regularly carry out comparative analyses of MCDA methods and propose guidelines for the selection of a priori relevant methods for the assessment problem considered. However, many of the selection criteria used are based on technical/operational assumptions that have little to do with the specificities of ex ante sustainability assessment of alternative cropping systems. We attempt here to provide a reasoned comparative review of the main groups of MCDA methods, based on considerations related to those specificities. The following main guidelines emerge from our discussion of these methods: (1) decision rule-based and outranking qualitative MCDA methods should be preferred; (2) different MCDA tools should be used simultaneously, making it possible to evaluate and compare the results obtained; and (3) a relevantly structured group of decision-makers should be established for the selection of tool variants of the choosen MCDA methods, the design/choice of sustainability criteria, and the analysis and interpretation of the evaluation results.
AB - Sustainability is a holistic and complex multi-dimensional concept encompassing economic, social and environmental issues, and its assessment is a key step in the implementation of sustainable agricultural systems. Realistic assessments of sustainability require: (1) the integration of diverse information concerning economic, social and environmental objectives; and (2) the handling of conflicting aspects of these objectives as a function of the views and opinions of the individuals involved in the assessment process. The assessment of sustainability is therefore increasingly regarded as a typical decision-making problem that could be handled by multi-criteria decision-aid (MCDA) methods. However, the number and variability of MCDA methods are continually increasing, and these methods are not all equally relevant for sustainability assessment. The demands for such approaches are also rapidly changing, and faster ex ante assessment approaches are required, to address scales currently insufficiently dealt with, such as cropping system level. Researchers regularly carry out comparative analyses of MCDA methods and propose guidelines for the selection of a priori relevant methods for the assessment problem considered. However, many of the selection criteria used are based on technical/operational assumptions that have little to do with the specificities of ex ante sustainability assessment of alternative cropping systems. We attempt here to provide a reasoned comparative review of the main groups of MCDA methods, based on considerations related to those specificities. The following main guidelines emerge from our discussion of these methods: (1) decision rule-based and outranking qualitative MCDA methods should be preferred; (2) different MCDA tools should be used simultaneously, making it possible to evaluate and compare the results obtained; and (3) a relevantly structured group of decision-makers should be established for the selection of tool variants of the choosen MCDA methods, the design/choice of sustainability criteria, and the analysis and interpretation of the evaluation results.
KW - Cropping system
KW - Decision rules
KW - Multi-criteria decision aid
KW - Outranking qualitative methods
KW - Qualitative information
KW - Sustainability assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=40049090347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=40049090347&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1051/agro:2007043
DO - 10.1051/agro:2007043
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:40049090347
SN - 1774-0746
VL - 28
SP - 163
EP - 174
JO - Agronomy for Sustainable Development
JF - Agronomy for Sustainable Development
IS - 1
ER -