IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/soceps/v66y2019icp149-160.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework for the analysis of socioeconomic and geographic sugarcane agro industry sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Aguilar-Rivera, Noé

Abstract

Sugarcane agroindustry sustainability is the result of interaction of technology, land suitability, environment, management practices, by-products utilization, socioeconomic and geographic constraints of stakeholders. Nevertheless, as competitiveness factor is measured by three self-dependent indicators: sugarcane, sucrose and factory yield by statistically analysis, without consider multiple interrelated and interdependent socioeconomics and ecological factors. This paper presented a method for development of composite sustainability index, based on the Multicriteria evaluation Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in a GIS, as a technique for supporting the decision making, which integrates in the analysis 14 sector-specific criteria ranked along all the three aspect of value chain, raw material production, processing and markets at the Mexican sugarcane agroindustry, as case study. These criteria were integrated in a hierarchic structure, pair-wise comparisons matrix and after obtaining the relative importance of each criterion, an integrated sustainability assessment tool was developed. Results show that the construction of sustainability index, provides a framework for assessing and zoning the sustainability, and the variables Sugarcane yield, Sugarcane Agroindustry final products, Sugar mill Yield and Productivity Index (Ratio Harvested area/sugar production), as socio-economic factors and Agro-climatic suitability for sugar cane cultivation are highly relevant with a overall weight of 69.5% and represent the key point of decision making by stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • Aguilar-Rivera, Noé, 2019. "A framework for the analysis of socioeconomic and geographic sugarcane agro industry sustainability," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 66(C), pages 149-160.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:66:y:2019:i:c:p:149-160
    DOI: 10.1016/j.seps.2018.07.006
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0038012117302379
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.seps.2018.07.006?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rendon-Sagardi, Miguel A. & Sanchez-Ramirez, Cuauhtemoc & Cortes-Robles, Guillermo & Alor-Hernandez, Giner & Cedillo-Campos, Miguel G., 2014. "Dynamic analysis of feasibility in ethanol supply chain for biofuel production in Mexico," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 123(C), pages 358-367.
    2. García, Carlos A. & Manzini, Fabio & Islas, Jorge M., 2017. "Sustainability assessment of ethanol production from two crops in Mexico," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 1199-1207.
    3. Silva Lora, Electo E. & Escobar Palacio, José C. & Rocha, Mateus H. & Grillo Renó, Maria L. & Venturini, Osvaldo J. & Almazán del Olmo, Oscar, 2011. "Issues to consider, existing tools and constraints in biofuels sustainability assessments," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 36(4), pages 2097-2110.
    4. Gillian Eggleston & Isabel Lima, 2015. "Sustainability Issues and Opportunities in the Sugar and Sugar-Bioproduct Industries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-27, September.
    5. Filoso, Solange & Carmo, Janaina Braga do & Mardegan, Sílvia Fernanda & Lins, Silvia Rafaela Machado & Gomes, Taciana Figueiredo & Martinelli, Luiz Antonio, 2015. "Reassessing the environmental impacts of sugarcane ethanol production in Brazil to help meet sustainability goals," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1847-1856.
    6. Jacek Malczewski, 2010. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis and Geographic Information Systems," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira & Salvatore Greco (ed.), Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, chapter 0, pages 369-395, Springer.
    7. Herreras Martínez, Sara & van Eijck, Janske & Pereira da Cunha, Marcelo & Guilhoto, Joaquim J.M. & Walter, Arnaldo & Faaij, Andre, 2013. "Analysis of socio-economic impacts of sustainable sugarcane–ethanol production by means of inter-regional Input–Output analysis: Demonstrated for Northeast Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 290-316.
    8. Scarlat, Nicolae & Dallemand, Jean-François, 2011. "Recent developments of biofuels/bioenergy sustainability certification: A global overview," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(3), pages 1630-1646, March.
    9. Reges Heinrichs & Rafael Otto & Aline Magalhães & Guilherme Constantino Meirelles, 2017. "Importance of Sugarcane in Brazilian and World Bioeconomy," Economic Complexity and Evolution, in: Stephan Dabbert & Iris Lewandowski & Jochen Weiss & Andreas Pyka (ed.), Knowledge-Driven Developments in the Bioeconomy, pages 205-217, Springer.
    10. Tom Waas & Jean Huge & Thomas BLOCK & Tarah Wright & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189410, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    11. Machado, Pedro Gerber & Picoli, Michelle Cristina Araujo & Torres, Laura Jimena & Oliveira, Janaína Garcia & Walter, Arnaldo, 2015. "The use of socioeconomic indicators to assess the impacts of sugarcane production in Brazil," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 1519-1526.
    12. Sindhu, Raveendran & Gnansounou, Edgard & Binod, Parameswaran & Pandey, Ashok, 2016. "Bioconversion of sugarcane crop residue for value added products – An overview," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 98(C), pages 203-215.
    13. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    14. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    15. Klaus Deininger & Derek Byerlee & Jonathan Lindsay & Andrew Norton & Harris Selod & Mercedes Stickler, 2011. "Rising Global Interest in Farmland : Can it Yield Sustainable and Equitable Benefits?," World Bank Publications - Books, The World Bank Group, number 2263, December.
    16. Schmitz, Troy G. & Lewis, Karen E., 2015. "Impact of NAFTA on U.S. and Mexican Sugar Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Western Agricultural Economics Association, vol. 40(3), pages 1-18, September.
    17. Cecile Gerwel Proches & Shamim Bodhanya, 2015. "Exploring stakeholder interactions through the lens of complexity theory: lessons from the sugar industry," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 49(6), pages 2507-2525, November.
    18. Tom Waas & Jean Hugé & Thomas Block & Tarah Wright & Francisco Benitez-Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, August.
    19. Kurka, Thomas, 2013. "Application of the analytic hierarchy process to evaluate the regional sustainability of bioenergy developments," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 393-402.
    20. Liu, Gang, 2014. "Development of a general sustainability indicator for renewable energy systems: A review," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 31(C), pages 611-621.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Victoria Vicario-Modroño & Rosa Gallardo-Cobos & Pedro Sánchez-Zamora, 2023. "Sustainability evaluation of olive oil mills in Andalusia (Spain): a study based on composite indicators," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 6363-6392, July.
    2. Guang Yang & Hua Yan & Quanfeng Li, 2023. "Coordination Analysis of Sustainable Agricultural Development in Northeast China from the Perspective of Spatiotemporal Relationships," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-25, November.
    3. Shu Yu & Yongtong Mu, 2022. "Sustainable Agricultural Development Assessment: A Comprehensive Review and Bibliometric Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(19), pages 1-18, September.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. García-Bustamante Carlos Alberto & Zepeda-Pirrón Manuel & Armendáriz-Arnez Cynthia & Aguilar-Rivera Noé, 2018. "Development of indicators for the sustainability of the sugar industry," Environmental & Socio-economic Studies, Sciendo, vol. 6(4), pages 22-38, December.
    2. Carole Brunet & Oumarou Savadogo & Pierre Baptiste & Michel A Bouchard & Jean Chrysostome Rakotoary & Andry Ravoninjatovo & Céline Cholez & Corinne Gendron & Nicolas Merveille, 2020. "Impacts Generated by a Large-Scale Solar Photovoltaic Power Plant Can Lead to Conflicts between Sustainable Development Goals: A Review of Key Lessons Learned in Madagascar," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-33, September.
    3. Campos-Guzmán, Verónica & García-Cáscales, M. Socorro & Espinosa, Nieves & Urbina, Antonio, 2019. "Life Cycle Analysis with Multi-Criteria Decision Making: A review of approaches for the sustainability evaluation of renewable energy technologies," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 343-366.
    4. Ishizaka, Alessio & Siraj, Sajid & Nemery, Philippe, 2016. "Which energy mix for the UK (United Kingdom)? An evolutive descriptive mapping with the integrated GAIA (graphical analysis for interactive aid)–AHP (analytic hierarchy process) visualization tool," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 602-611.
    5. Catherine Le Roux & Marius Pretorius, 2016. "Conceptualizing the Limiting Issues Inhibiting Sustainability Embeddedness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    6. Yuan, Mei-Hua & Lo, Shang-Lien, 2020. "Developing indicators for the monitoring of the sustainability of food, energy, and water," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 119(C).
    7. Justyna Patalas-Maliszewska & Hanna Łosyk, 2020. "An Approach to Assessing Sustainability in the Development of a Manufacturing Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    8. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    9. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    10. Weiwei Li & Pingtao Yi & Danning Zhang, 2018. "Sustainability Evaluation of Cities in Northeastern China Using Dynamic TOPSIS-Entropy Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    11. Ying Zhou & Weiwei Li & Pingtao Yi & Chengju Gong, 2019. "Evaluation of City Sustainability from the Perspective of Behavioral Guidance," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-17, November.
    12. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    13. Sungjo Hong & Ihl Kweon & Bum-Hyun Lee & Heechul Kim, 2019. "Indicators and Assessment System for Sustainability of Municipalities: A Case Study of South Korea’s Assessment of Sustainability of Cities (ASC)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-21, November.
    14. Johan Du Plessis & Wouter Bam, 2018. "Comparing the Sustainable Development Potential of Industries: A Role for Sustainability Disclosures?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, March.
    15. Jean Hugé & Nibedita Mukherjee & Camille Fertel & Jean-Philippe Waaub & Thomas Block & Tom Waas & Nico Koedam & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2015. "Conceptualizing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Assessment in Development Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-17, May.
    16. Kajsa Borgnäs, 2017. "Indicators as ‘circular argumentation constructs’? An input–output analysis of the variable structure of five environmental sustainability country rankings," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 769-790, June.
    17. Catherine Dezio & Davide Marino, 2018. "Towards an Impact Evaluation Framework to Measure Urban Resilience in Food Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    18. Hernandez-Perdomo, Elvis A. & Mun, Johnathan & Rocco S., Claudio M., 2017. "Active management in state-owned energy companies: Integrating a real options approach into multicriteria analysis to make companies sustainable," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 195(C), pages 487-502.
    19. Marcellinus Essah, 2022. "Gold mining in Ghana and the UN Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring community perspectives on social and environmental injustices," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 127-138, February.
    20. Karel Doubravský & Alena Kocmanová & Mirko Dohnal, 2018. "Analysis of Sustainability Decision Trees Generated by Qualitative Models Based on Equationless Heuristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Multicriteria evaluation; AHP; Constraints; Crop field; Sugar mill;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • Q55 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environmental Economics: Technological Innovation
    • Q56 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Environmental Economics - - - Environment and Development; Environment and Trade; Sustainability; Environmental Accounts and Accounting; Environmental Equity; Population Growth
    • C52 - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods - - Econometric Modeling - - - Model Evaluation, Validation, and Selection

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:soceps:v:66:y:2019:i:c:p:149-160. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/seps .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.