IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/iaae06/25417.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

A Multifunctional Comparison of Conventional versus Alternative Olive Systems in Spain by Using AHP

Author

Listed:
  • Parra-Lopez, Carlos
  • Calatrava-Requena, Javier

Abstract

Sustainability of agriculture is strongly related to the multifunctional role implicitly or explicitly recognized to it in the framework of the European Union CAP. This multifunctional role entails a multicriteria approach when assessing the performance and value for society of farming systems. Multicriteria assessment of agricultural systems is characterized by the existence of many criteria often conflicting among then, many stakeholders and decision-makers with competing interests, and lack of information. Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) is a multicriteria methodology that allows dealing with these problems, in a relatively easy, flexible and economical manner, and therefore it is a potentially useful tool in this field, although its application with this purpose has not been found in the literature. Therefore, this paper aims (1) to present AHP as a useful methodology to effectively assess and compare the multifunctional performances of agricultural systems, and (2) to apply AHP in the comparison, on the basis of experts' knowledge, of multiple functions -economic, technical, sociocultural and environmental- of conventional, organic and integrated olive producing systems in a region of Spain, and test the hypothetical superiority of the alternative systems with respect to the conventional one in the medium/long term and the average conditions of the region. Results confirm this global superiority thus providing a scientific base to endorse institutional and social support regarding the promotion and implementation of these alternative farming techniques. However, environmental issues are the more conflictive among experts and require a more in depth research in the future to clarify many of them.

Suggested Citation

  • Parra-Lopez, Carlos & Calatrava-Requena, Javier, 2006. "A Multifunctional Comparison of Conventional versus Alternative Olive Systems in Spain by Using AHP," 2006 Annual Meeting, August 12-18, 2006, Queensland, Australia 25417, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:iaae06:25417
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.25417
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/25417/files/cp060281.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.25417?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
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Pacini, Cesare & Giesen, G.W.J. & Vazzana, V. & Wossink, Ada, 2002. "Sustainability of Organic, Integrated and Conventional Farming Systems in Tuscany," 13th Congress, Wageningen, The Netherlands, July 7-12, 2002 6956, International Farm Management Association.
    2. Ramanathan, R. & Ganesh, L. S., 1994. "Group preference aggregation methods employed in AHP: An evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members' weightages," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 79(2), pages 249-265, December.
    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. Parra-López, Carlos & Sayadi, Samir & Garcia-Garcia, Guillermo & Ben Abdallah, Saker & Carmona-Torres, Carmen, 2023. "Prioritising conservation actions towards the sustainability of the dehesa by integrating the demands of society," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 206(C).

    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. Xu, Zeshui, 2005. "Deviation measures of linguistic preference relations in group decision making," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 33(3), pages 249-254, June.
    2. Ni Li & Minghui Sun & Zhuming Bi & Zeya Su & Chao Wang, 2014. "A new methodology to support group decision-making for IoT-based emergency response systems," Information Systems Frontiers, Springer, vol. 16(5), pages 953-977, November.
    3. Mateos, A. & Jimenez, A. & Rios-Insua, S., 2006. "Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1842-1864, November.
    4. Forman, Ernest & Peniwati, Kirti, 1998. "Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 108(1), pages 165-169, July.
    5. Timo Sipiläinen & Anni Huhtala, 2013. "Opportunity costs of providing crop diversity in organic and conventional farming: would targeted environmental policies make economic sense?," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 40(3), pages 441-462, July.
    6. Henao, Felipe & Cherni, Judith A. & Jaramillo, Patricia & Dyner, Isaac, 2012. "A multicriteria approach to sustainable energy supply for the rural poor," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 218(3), pages 801-809.
    7. José María Moreno-Jiménez & Manuel Salvador & Pilar Gargallo & Alfredo Altuzarra, 2016. "Systemic decision making in AHP: a Bayesian approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 261-284, October.
    8. Jacinto González-Pachón & Carlos Romero, 2007. "Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 154(1), pages 123-132, October.
    9. Bolloju, N., 2001. "Aggregation of analytic hierarchy process models based on similarities in decision makers' preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 128(3), pages 499-508, February.
    10. Sureeyatanapas, Panitas & Sriwattananusart, Kawinpob & Niyamosoth, Thanawath & Sessomboon, Weerapat & Arunyanart, Sirawadee, 2018. "Supplier selection towards uncertain and unavailable information: An extension of TOPSIS method," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 5(C), pages 69-79.
    11. Arpaphan Pattanapant & Ganesh P. Shivakoti, 2009. "Opportunities and constraints of organic agriculture in Chiang Mai Province, Thailand," Asia-Pacific Development Journal, United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP), vol. 16(1), pages 115-147, June.
    12. B S Ahn & S H Choi, 2008. "ERP system selection using a simulation-based AHP approach: a case of Korean homeshopping company," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 59(3), pages 322-330, March.
    13. Schonhart, Martin & Schauppenlehner, Thomas & Schmid, Erwin, 2010. "Integrated land use modelling of agri-environmental measures to maintain biodiversity at landscape level," 120th Seminar, September 2-4, 2010, Chania, Crete 109401, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    14. Xunjie Gou & Zeshui Xu & Xinxin Wang & Huchang Liao, 2021. "Managing consensus reaching process with self-confident double hierarchy linguistic preference relations in group decision making," Fuzzy Optimization and Decision Making, Springer, vol. 20(1), pages 51-79, March.
    15. Zeshui Xu & Xiaoqiang Cai, 2013. "On Consensus of Group Decision Making with Interval Utility Values and Interval Preference Orderings," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 997-1019, November.
    16. Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Iglesias-Merchan & Carlos Romero & Silvestre García de Jalón, 2020. "The Sustainable Management of Land and Fisheries Resources Using Multicriteria Techniques: A Meta-Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    17. Hsu-Shih Shih, 2016. "A Mixed-Data Evaluation in Group TOPSIS with Differentiated Decision Power," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 537-565, May.
    18. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Analytic hierarchy process-hesitant group decision making," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 239(3), pages 794-801.
    19. Aull-Hyde, Rhonda & Erdogan, Sevgi & Duke, Joshua M., 2006. "An experiment on the consistency of aggregated comparison matrices in AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 171(1), pages 290-295, May.
    20. R.C. Van den Honert, 2001. "Decisional Power in Group Decision Making: A Note on the Allocation of Group Members' Weights in the Multiplicative AHP and SMART," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 10(3), pages 275-286, May.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Crop Production/Industries;

    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:ags:iaae06:25417. 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: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/iaaeeea.html .

    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.