| Affiliation: | 1.Department of Engineering,Aarhus University,Aarhus,Denmark;2.Animal Production Systems Group,Wageningen University,Wageningen,The Netherlands;3.Centre for Sustainability: Agriculture, Food, Energy, Environment,University of Otago,Dunedin,New Zealand;4.Social Sciences Unit,Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO),Merelbeke,Belgium;5.Ecosystem Management Research Group and IMDO,University of Antwerp,Wilrijk,Belgium;6.Invermay Agricultural Centre,AgResearch,Mosgiel,New Zealand;7.Agriculture and Life Sciences,Lincoln University,Lincoln,New Zealand;8.Landcare Research,Dunedin,New Zealand;9.INRA, UMR 1248 AGIR,Castanet-Tolosan,France;10.Universidad Nacional de Chilecito,La Rioja,Argentina;11.Ministry for Primary Industries,Wellington,New Zealand;12.The Agribusiness Group,Lincoln University,Lincoln,New Zealand;13.INRA, UMR 1121 Agronomie et Environnement,INRA-Université de Lorraine,Colmar Cedex,France;14.UMR 1121, Agronomie et Environnement,Université de Lorraine,Colmar Cedex,France;15.Department of Sociology, Gender and Social Work,University of Otago,Dunedin,New Zealand;16.The BHU Future Farming Centre,Lincoln,New Zealand;17.SEGES,Aarhus N,Denmark;18.Ngai Tahu Research Centre,University of Canterbury,Christchurch,New Zealand;19.Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL),Frick,Switzerland;20.Centre for Science Communication,University of Otago,Dunedin,New Zealand;21.Agribusiness and Economics Research Unit,Lincoln University,Lincoln,New Zealand |
| Abstract: | Sustainability indicators are well recognized for their potential to assess and monitor sustainable development of agricultural systems. A large number of indicators are proposed in various sustainability assessment frameworks, which raises concerns regarding the validity of approaches, usefulness and trust in such frameworks. Selecting indicators requires transparent and well-defined procedures to ensure the relevance and validity of sustainability assessments. The objective of this study, therefore, was to determine whether experts agree on which criteria are most important in the selection of indicators and indicator sets for robust sustainability assessments. Two groups of experts (Temperate Agriculture Research Network and New Zealand Sustainability Dashboard) were asked to rank the relative importance of eleven criteria for selecting individual indicators and of nine criteria for balancing a collective set of indicators. Both ranking surveys reveal a startling lack of consensus amongst experts about how best to measure agricultural sustainability and call for a radical rethink about how complementary approaches to sustainability assessments are used alongside each other to ensure a plurality of views and maximum collaboration and trust amongst stakeholders. To improve the transparency, relevance and robustness of sustainable assessments, the context of the sustainability assessment, including prioritizations of selection criteria for indicator selection, must be accounted for. A collaborative design process will enhance the acceptance of diverse values and prioritizations embedded in sustainability assessments. The process by which indicators and sustainability frameworks are established may be a much more important determinant of their success than the final shape of the assessment tools. Such an emphasis on process would make assessments more transparent, transformative and enduring. |
