IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/ifma02/6956.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Sustainability of Organic, Integrated and Conventional Farming Systems in Tuscany

Author

Listed:
  • Pacini, Cesare
  • Giesen, G.W.J.
  • Vazzana, V.
  • Wossink, Ada

Abstract

Agricultural researchers widely recognise the importance of sustainable agricultural production systems and the need to develop appropriate methods to measure sustainability. The principal purpose of this paper is to evaluate the financial and environmental aspects of sustainability of Organic, Integrated and Conventional Farming Systems (OFS, IFS, and CFS, respectively) at farm and more detailed spatial scales. This is achieved applying an integrated economic-environmental accounting framework to three case study farms in Tuscany including different farming systems and different spatial scales. The environmental performances of the FS were measured through the application of an Environmental Accounting Information Systems (EAIS) at field, site and farm level. The EAIS indicators were then integrated with (1) a set of financial indicators to evaluate the economic and environmental trade-offs between different FS and (2) with information on the regional and site-specific soil and climate conditions to study the impact of different pedo-climates on the environmental performances of the FS. The gross margins of steady-state OFS were found to be higher than the corresponding CFS gross margins. OFS perform better than I/CFS with respect to nitrogen losses, pesticide impact, herbaceous plant biodiversity and most of the other environmental indicators. However, on hilly soils, erosion revealed to be higher in OFS than in CFS. The pesticide and the nitrogen indicators showed, for this example, that the environmental impact due to integrated and conventional farming practices is similar. Regional pedoclimatic factors resulted to have a considerable impact on nutrient losses, soil erosion, pesticide impact and herbaceous plant biodiversity, site-specific factors on nutrient losses and soil erosion. Conclusions are drawn on the possible practical applications of the method for environmental measures in the agricultural sector.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:ifma02:6956
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.6956
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/6956/files/cp02pa01.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.6956?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. Coiner, Colette & Wu, JunJie & Polasky, Stephen, 2001. "Economic and environmental implications of alternative landscape designs in the Walnut Creek Watershed of Iowa," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 38(1), pages 119-139, July.
    2. Pannell, David J. & Glenn, Nicole A., 2000. "A framework for the economic evaluation and selection of sustainability indicators in agriculture," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(1), pages 135-149, April.
    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. 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.
    2. 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.
    3. 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.
    4. Epiphane Sodjinou & Laurent Glin & Gian Nicolay & Silvère Tovignan & Jonas Hinvi, 2015. "Socioeconomic determinants of organic cotton adoption in Benin, West Africa," Agricultural and Food Economics, Springer;Italian Society of Agricultural Economics (SIDEA), vol. 3(1), pages 1-22, December.
    5. 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.
    6. Sipilainen, Timo & Marklund, Per-Olov & Huhtala, Anni, 2008. "Efficiency In Agricultural Production Of Biodiversity: Organic Vs. Conventional Practices," 107th Seminar, January 30-February 1, 2008, Sevilla, Spain 6478, European Association of Agricultural Economists.
    7. Craig Bond & Y. Farzin, 2008. "Alternative Sustainability Criteria, Externalities, and Welfare in a Simple Agroecosystem Model: A Numerical Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 40(3), pages 383-399, July.
    8. Sipilainen, Timo & Huhtala, Anni, 2012. "Opportunity Costs of Providing Crop Diversity in Organic and Conventional Farming," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 126652, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Giuseppina Siciliano, 2009. "Social multicriteria evaluation of farming practices in the presence of soil degradation. A case study in Southern Tuscany, Italy," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 11(6), pages 1107-1133, December.

    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. Agnieszka Wojewódzka-Wiewiórska & Anna Kłoczko-Gajewska & Piotr Sulewski, 2019. "Between the Social and Economic Dimensions of Sustainability in Rural Areas—In Search of Farmers’ Quality of Life," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(1), pages 1-26, December.
    2. Farnaz Pourzand & Mohammad Bakhshoodeh, 2014. "Technical effici ency and agricultural sustainability–technology gap of maize producers in Fars province of Iran," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 16(3), pages 671-688, June.
    3. Zabel, Astrid & Engel, Stefanie, 2010. "Performance payments: A new strategy to conserve large carnivores in the tropics?," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(2), pages 405-412, December.
    4. 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.
    5. Jollands, Nigel & Harmsworth, Garth, 2007. "Participation of indigenous groups in sustainable development monitoring: Rationale and examples from New Zealand," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(3-4), pages 716-726, May.
    6. 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.
    7. Pouria Ataei & Hassan Sadighi & Mohammad Chizari & Enayat Abbasi, 2020. "In-depth content analysis of conservation agriculture training programs in Iran based on sustainability dimensions," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(8), pages 7215-7237, December.
    8. Andrew J. Plantinga & JunJie Wu, 2003. "Co-Benefits from Carbon Sequestration in Forests: Evaluating Reductions in Agricultural Externalities from an Afforestation Policy in Wisconsin," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 79(1), pages 74-85.
    9. S.P. Dissanayake & L.H.P. Gunaratne & T. Sivananthawerl & G.A.S Ginigaddara, 2021. "Is Agricultural Sustainability Positively Related with Technical Efficiency? A Case of Paddy-Cattle Integration Farming Systems, Anuradhapura District, Sri Lanka," International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science, International Journal of Research and Innovation in Social Science (IJRISS), vol. 5(12), pages 968-976, December.
    10. Schägner, Jan Philipp & Brander, Luke & Maes, Joachim & Hartje, Volkmar, 2013. "Mapping ecosystem services' values: Current practice and future prospects," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 33-46.
    11. Michalopoulos, T. & Hogeveen, H. & Heuvelink, E. & Oude Lansink, A.G.J.M., 2013. "Public multi-criteria assessment for societal concerns and gradual labelling," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(C), pages 97-108.
    12. Jan Philipp Schägner & Luke Brander & Joachim Maes & Volkmar Hartje, 2012. "Mapping Ecosystem Services’ Values: Current Practice and Future Prospects," Working Papers 2012.59, Fondazione Eni Enrico Mattei.
    13. Alessandro SCUDERI & Luisa STURIALE, 2016. "Multi-criteria evaluation model to face phytosanitary emergencies: The case of citrus fruits farming in Italy," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(5), pages 205-214.
    14. Irina Santiago-Brown & Andrew Metcalfe & Cate Jerram & Cassandra Collins, 2015. "Sustainability Assessment in Wine-Grape Growing in the New World: Economic, Environmental, and Social Indicators for Agricultural Businesses," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-27, June.
    15. Trautman, Dawn & Jeffrey, Scott R. & Unterschultz, James R., 2012. "Beneficial Management Practice (BMP) Adoption -- Direct Farm Cost/Benefit Tradeoffs," Project Report Series 139638, University of Alberta, Department of Resource Economics and Environmental Sociology.
    16. M.A. Quaddus & M.A.B. Siddique, 2013. "Application of decision support tools in sustainable development planning: review and analysis," Chapters, in: M. A. Quaddus & M. A.B. Siddique (ed.), Handbook of Sustainable Development Planning, chapter 1, pages 3-16, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    17. Brownson, Katherine & Fowler, Laurie, 2020. "Evaluating how we evaluate success: Monitoring, evaluation and adaptive management in Payments for Watershed Services programs," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 94(C).
    18. Javier Rodrigo-Ilarri & Claudia P. Romero & María-Elena Rodrigo-Clavero, 2020. "Land Use/Land Cover Assessment over Time Using a New Weighted Environmental Index (WEI) Based on an Object-Oriented Model and GIS Data," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    19. Anthony William Bennett & Simone Müller Loose, 2024. "User-Centered Development of an Online Dashboard Tool for Economic Sustainability for Small and Medium Enterprises," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-24, January.
    20. Agata Malak-Rawlikowska & Monika Gębska & Robert Hoste & Christine Leeb & Claudio Montanari & Michael Wallace & Kees de Roest, 2021. "Developing a Methodology for Aggregated Assessment of the Economic Sustainability of Pig Farms," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(6), pages 1-25, March.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Farm Management; Land Economics/Use;

    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:ifma02:6956. 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/ifmaaea.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.