IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v7y2015i9p12386-12401d55534.html

Experiential Knowledge Complements an LCA-Based Decision Support Framework

Author

Listed:
  • Heng Yi Teah

    (Graduate Program in Sustainability Science, Global Leadership Initiative (GPSS-GLI), Division of Environmental Studies, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 332 Building of Environmental Studies, 5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa City, Chiba 277-8563, Japan)

  • Yasuhiro Fukushima

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Graduate School of Engineering, Tohoku University, 6-6-07, Aramaki Aza Aoba, Aoba-ku, Sendai, Miyagi 980-8579, Japan)

  • Motoharu Onuki

    (Graduate Program in Sustainability Science, Global Leadership Initiative (GPSS-GLI), Division of Environmental Studies, Graduate School of Frontier Sciences, The University of Tokyo, 332 Building of Environmental Studies, 5-1-5 Kashiwanoha, Kashiwa City, Chiba 277-8563, Japan)

Abstract

A shrimp farmer in Taiwan practices innovation through trial-and-error for better income and a better environment, but such farmer-based innovation sometimes fails because the biological mechanism is unclear. Systematic field experimentation and laboratory research are often too costly, and simulating ground conditions is often too challenging. To solve this dilemma, we propose a decision support framework that explicitly utilizes farmer experiential knowledge through a participatory approach to alternatively estimate prospective change in shrimp farming productivity, and to co-design options for improvement. Data obtained from the farmer enable us to quantitatively analyze the production cost and greenhouse gas (GHG) emission with a life cycle assessment (LCA) methodology. We used semi-quantitative graphical representations of indifference curves and mixing triangles to compare and show better options for the farmer. Our results empower the farmer to make decisions more systematically and reliably based on the frequency of heterotrophic bacteria application and the revision of feed input. We argue that experiential knowledge may be less accurate due to its dependence on varying levels of farmer experience, but this knowledge is a reasonable alternative for immediate decision-making. More importantly, our developed framework advances the scope of LCA application to support practically important yet scientifically uncertain cases.

Suggested Citation

  • Heng Yi Teah & Yasuhiro Fukushima & Motoharu Onuki, 2015. "Experiential Knowledge Complements an LCA-Based Decision Support Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(9), pages 1-16, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:9:p:12386-12401:d:55534
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/9/12386/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/7/9/12386/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Tom MacMillan & Tim G. Benton, 2014. "Agriculture: Engage farmers in research," Nature, Nature, vol. 509(7498), pages 25-27, May.
    2. Matthias Finkbeiner & Erwin M. Schau & Annekatrin Lehmann & Marzia Traverso, 2010. "Towards Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 2(10), pages 1-14, October.
    3. Volker Hoffmann & Kirsten Probst & Anja Christinck, 2007. "Farmers and researchers: How can collaborative advantages be created in participatory research and technology development?," Agriculture and Human Values, Springer;The Agriculture, Food, & Human Values Society (AFHVS), vol. 24(3), pages 355-368, September.
    4. Torkamani, Javad, 2005. "Using a whole-farm modelling approach to assess prospective technologies under uncertainty," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 85(2), pages 138-154, August.
    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. Heng Yi Teah & Tomohiro Akiyama & Ricardo San Carlos & Orlando Vargas Rayo & Yu Ting Joanne Khew & Sijia Zhao & Lingfeng Zheng & Motoharu Onuki, 2016. "Assessment of Downscaling Planetary Boundaries to Semi-Arid Ecosystems with a Local Perception: A Case Study in the Middle Reaches of Heihe River," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-11, November.

    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. Pawera, Lukas & Manickam, Ravishankar & Wangungu, Carolyne & Bonnarith, Uon & Schreinemachers, Pepijn & Ramasamy, Srinivasan, 2024. "Guidance on farmer participation in the design, testing and scaling of agricultural innovations," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 218(C).
    2. Padel, Susanne & Vaarst, Mette & Zaralis, Konstantinos, 2015. "Supporting Innovation in Organic Agriculture: A European Perspective Using Experience from the SOLID Project," Sustainable Agriculture Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 4(3 Special).
    3. Kristina Henzler & Stephanie D. Maier & Michael Jäger & Rafael Horn, 2020. "SDG-Based Sustainability Assessment Methodology for Innovations in the Field of Urban Surfaces," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, June.
    4. Janssen, Sander & van Ittersum, Martin K., 2007. "Assessing farm innovations and responses to policies: A review of bio-economic farm models," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 94(3), pages 622-636, June.
    5. Hannah Karlewski & Annekatrin Lehmann & Klaus Ruhland & Matthias Finkbeiner, 2019. "A Practical Approach for Social Life Cycle Assessment in the Automotive Industry," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(3), pages 1-60, August.
    6. Oana Țugulea, 2017. "City Brand Personality—Relations with Dimensions and Dimensions Inter-Relations," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-22, December.
    7. Cristina López & Rocío Ruíz-Benítez & Carmen Vargas-Machuca, 2019. "On the Environmental and Social Sustainability of Technological Innovations in Urban Bus Transport: The EU Case," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-22, March.
    8. Benjamin C. Wilde & Eva Lieberherr & Andrew E. Okem & Johan Six, 2019. "Nitrified Human Urine as a Sustainable and Socially Acceptable Fertilizer: An Analysis of Consumer Acceptance in Msunduzi, South Africa," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-13, April.
    9. Mauro Sciarelli & Mario Tani & Giovanni Landi & Ornella Papaluca, 2019. "The Impact of Social Responsibility Disclosure on Corporate Financial Health: Evidences from Some Italian Public Companies," International Business Research, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 12(3), pages 109-122, March.
    10. Julian Gaus & Sven Wehking & Andreas H. Glas & Michael Eßig, 2022. "Economic Sustainability by Using Life Cycle Cost Information in the Buying Center: Insights from the Public Sector," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(3), pages 1-28, February.
    11. Diana Carolina Gámez-García & José Manuel Gómez-Soberón & Ramón Corral-Higuera & Héctor Saldaña-Márquez & María Consolación Gómez-Soberón & Susana Paola Arredondo-Rea, 2018. "A Cradle to Handover Life Cycle Assessment of External Walls: Choice of Materials and Prognosis of Elements," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-24, August.
    12. Reed, Brinton & Chan-Halbrendt, Catherine & Tamang, B.B. & Chaudhary, Narendra, 2014. "Analysis of conservation agriculture preferences for researchers, extension agents, and tribal farmers in Nepal using Analytic Hierarchy Process," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 90-96.
    13. Man Yu & Anthony Halog, 2015. "Solar Photovoltaic Development in Australia—A Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-35, January.
    14. Serenella Sala & Rana Pant & Michael Hauschild & David Pennington, 2012. "Research Needs and Challenges from Science to Decision Support. Lesson Learnt from the Development of the International Reference Life Cycle Data System (ILCD) Recommendations for Life Cycle Impact Assessment," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(7), pages 1-14, June.
    15. Henke, S. & Theuvsen, L., . "Social Life Cycle Assessment: Eine sozioökonomische Analyse der Biogasproduktion," Proceedings “Schriften der Gesellschaft für Wirtschafts- und Sozialwissenschaften des Landbaues e.V.”, German Association of Agricultural Economists (GEWISOLA), vol. 49.
    16. Thies, Christian & Kieckhäfer, Karsten & Spengler, Thomas S. & Sodhi, Manbir S., 2019. "Operations research for sustainability assessment of products: A review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 274(1), pages 1-21.
    17. Mona Ghafouri‐Azar & Sara Diamond & Jeremy Bowes & Ehsan Gholamalizadeh, 2023. "The sustainable transport planning index: A tool for the sustainable implementation of public transportation," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 31(4), pages 2656-2677, August.
    18. Fahad, Shah & Wang, Jing & Hu, Guangyin & Wang, Hui & Yang, Xiaoying & Shah, Ashfaq Ahmad & Huong, Nguyen Thi Lan & Bilal, Arshad, 2018. "Empirical analysis of factors influencing farmers crop insurance decisions in Pakistan: Evidence from Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 459-467.
    19. Jaume Freire-Gonz lez & Ignasi Puig-Ventosa, 2015. "Energy Efficiency Policies and the Jevons Paradox," International Journal of Energy Economics and Policy, Econjournals, vol. 5(1), pages 69-79.
    20. Stella Stoycheva & Alex Zabeo & Lisa Pizzol & Danail Hristozov, 2022. "Socio-Economic Life Cycle-Based Framework for Safe and Sustainable Design of Engineered Nanomaterials and Nano-Enabled Products," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-23, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    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:gam:jsusta:v:7:y:2015:i:9:p:12386-12401:d:55534. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.