IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v100y2009i1-3p22-30.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Evaluating an environmental indicator: Case study of MERLIN, a method for assessing the risk of nitrate leaching

Author

Listed:
  • Aveline, A.
  • Rousseau, M.L.
  • Guichard, L.
  • Laurent, M.
  • Bockstaller, C.

Abstract

The need to achieve acceptable levels of nitrate in drinking water has led to the development of simulation models and indicators for assessing the environmental performance of agricultural practices. These indicators are necessarily based on simplifications in order to meet the practical constraints of feasibility, but they should nevertheless meet scientific standards, especially as regards their validation. The overall objective of this paper is to evaluate the MERLIN indicator and sub-indicators, an assessment method developed by French agricultural advisors. This tool estimates and classes the risks of water pollution by nitrates, integrating farmer practices both during crop cultivation and in between two successive crops, as well as soil sensitivity to leaching. The evaluation was performed according to the methodological framework proposed by Bockstaller and Girardin [Bockstaller, C., Girardin, P., 2003. How to validate environmental indicators? Agric. Syst. 76, 639-653]: design, output and end-use validation. Design validation involved submission of the method to experts and checking the sub-indicators against literature. Output validation was carried out by comparing real values to indicator outputs. End-use validation was based on information gathered by users. In particular we compared output data from the original method with that of users that had adapted the method to their situation, in order to assess the consequences of these changes. The first step confirmed that the assumptions of MERLIN and its sub-indicators are scientifically sound. However, the weighting of the different sub-indicators raised questions. The second output validation step gave acceptable results for the EQUIF sub-indicator but the MERLIN test highlighted the need for additional experimental data before validation. This approach also showed that improvements in the precision of parameters do not necessarily increase the accuracy of the classification. The last step confirmed that the indicator is considered useful by decision-makers but also reveals that in some cases users adapt parameter values to their situation. This has lead to the production of a user guide which defines the method more clearly to avoid numerous adaptations by users.

Suggested Citation

  • Aveline, A. & Rousseau, M.L. & Guichard, L. & Laurent, M. & Bockstaller, C., 2009. "Evaluating an environmental indicator: Case study of MERLIN, a method for assessing the risk of nitrate leaching," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 100(1-3), pages 22-30, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:100:y:2009:i:1-3:p:22-30
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308-521X(08)00132-7
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Bockstaller, C. & Girardin, P., 2003. "How to validate environmental indicators," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 76(2), pages 639-653, May.
    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. Ileana Iocola & Frederique Angevin & Christian Bockstaller & Rui Catarino & Michael Curran & Antoine Messéan & Christian Schader & Didier Stilmant & Florence Van Stappen & Paul Vanhove & Hauke Ahneman, 2020. "An Actor-Oriented Multi-Criteria Assessment Framework to Support a Transition towards Sustainable Agricultural Systems Based on Crop Diversification," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-29, July.
    2. Choquet, Pauline & Gabrielle, Benoit & Chalhoub, Maha & Michelin, Joël & Sauzet, Ophélie & Scammacca, Ottone & Garnier, Patricia & Baveye, Philippe C. & Montagne, David, 2021. "Comparison of empirical and process-based modelling to quantify soil-supported ecosystem services on the Saclay plateau (France)," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 50(C).
    3. A. Pires & J. Morato & H. Peixoto & S. Bradley & A. Muller, 2020. "Synthesizing and standardizing criteria for the evaluation of sustainability indicators in the water sector," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(7), pages 6671-6689, October.

    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. Fermín Sánchez-Carracedo & Jordi Segalas & Gorka Bueno & Pere Busquets & Joan Climent & Victor G. Galofré & Boris Lazzarini & David Lopez & Carme Martín & Rafael Miñano & Estíbaliz Sáez de Cámara & Bá, 2021. "Tools for Embedding and Assessing Sustainable Development Goals in Engineering Education," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(21), pages 1-30, November.
    2. Spaeter, Sandrine & Verchère, Alban, 2004. "Aléa moral et politiques d’audit optimales dans le cadre de la pollution d’origine agricole de l’eau," Cahiers d'Economie et de Sociologie Rurales (CESR), Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique (INRA), vol. 71.
    3. Jacquet, Florence & Butault, Jean-Pierre & Guichard, Laurence, 2011. "An economic analysis of the possibility of reducing pesticides in French field crops," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(9), pages 1638-1648, July.
    4. Oscar Reicher & Verónica Delgado & José-Luis Arumi, 2021. "Use of Indicators in Strategic Environmental Assessments of Urban-Planning Instruments: A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-18, November.
    5. Shamsheer Haq & Ismet Boz, 2020. "Measuring environmental, economic, and social sustainability index of tea farms in Rize Province, Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 2545-2567, March.
    6. Meiling Zhang & Stephen Nazieh & Teddy Nkrumah & Xingyu Wang, 2021. "Simulating Grassland Carbon Dynamics in Gansu for the Past Fifty (50) Years (1968–2018) Using the Century Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(16), pages 1-20, August.
    7. Groot, Jeroen C.J. & Oomen, Gerard J.M. & Rossing, Walter A.H., 2012. "Multi-objective optimization and design of farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 63-77.
    8. Adriana Luciano & Federica Pascale & Francesco Polverino & Alison Pooley, 2020. "Measuring Age-Friendly Housing: A Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-35, January.
    9. Ranjan Roy & Ngai Weng Chan, 2012. "An assessment of agricultural sustainability indicators in Bangladesh: review and synthesis," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 32(1), pages 99-110, March.
    10. van Calker, K.J. & Berentsen, P.B.M. & de Boer, I.J.M. & Giesen, G.W.J. & Huirne, R.B.M., 2007. "Modelling worker physical health and societal sustainability at farm level: An application to conventional and organic dairy farming," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(2), pages 205-219, May.
    11. Berjawi, A.E.H. & Walker, S.L. & Patsios, C. & Hosseini, S.H.R., 2021. "An evaluation framework for future integrated energy systems: A whole energy systems approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    12. Carof, Matthieu & Godinot, Olivier, 2018. "A free online tool to calculate three nitrogen-related indicators for farming systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 28-33.
    13. Torres-Sibille, Ana del Carmen & Cloquell-Ballester, Vicente-Agustín & Cloquell-Ballester, Víctor-Andrés & Artacho Ramírez, Miguel Ángel, 2009. "Aesthetic impact assessment of solar power plants: An objective and a subjective approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(5), pages 986-999, June.
    14. Juventia, Stella D. & Selin Norén, Isabella L.M. & van Apeldoorn, Dirk F. & Ditzler, Lenora & Rossing, Walter A.H., 2022. "Spatio-temporal design of strip cropping systems," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    15. Frédéric Zahm & Philippe Viaux & Lionel Vilain & Philippe Girardin & Christian Mouchet, 2008. "Assessing farm sustainability with the IDEA method - from the concept of agriculture sustainability to case studies on farms," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 16(4), pages 271-281.
    16. Gabriel Hoh Teck Ling & Pau Chung Leng, 2018. "Ten Steps Qualitative Modelling: Development and Validation of Conceptual Institutional-Social-Ecological Model of Public Open Space (POS) Governance and Quality," Resources, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, September.
    17. Paula Trivino-Tarradas & Manuel R. Gomez-Ariza & Gottlieb Basch & Emilio J. Gonzalez-Sanchez, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of Annual and Permanent Crops: The Inspia Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, January.
    18. Torres Sibille, Ana del Carmen & Cloquell-Ballester, Víctor-Andrés & Cloquell-Ballester, Vicente-Agustín & Darton, Richard, 2009. "Development and validation of a multicriteria indicator for the assessment of objective aesthetic impact of wind farms," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 40-66, January.
    19. Walter, Alexander I. & Helgenberger, Sebastian & Wiek, Arnim & Scholz, Roland W., 2007. "Measuring societal effects of transdisciplinary research projects: Design and application of an evaluation method," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 30(4), pages 325-338, November.
    20. Laura Meehan August & John B. Faust & Lara Cushing & Lauren Zeise & George V. Alexeeff, 2012. "Methodological Considerations in Screening for Cumulative Environmental Health Impacts: Lessons Learned from a Pilot Study in California," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 9(9), pages 1-16, August.

    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:agisys:v:100:y:2009:i:1-3:p:22-30. 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/agsy .

    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.