Biosecurity in agriculture: an economic analysis of coexistence of professional and hobby production

One component of biosecurity is protection against invasive alien species, which are one of the most important threats worldwide to native biodiversity and economic profitability in various sectors, including agriculture. However, agricultural producers are not homogeneous. They may have different objectives and priorities, use different technologies, and occupy heterogeneous parcels of land. If the producers differ in terms of their attitude towards invasive pests and the damages they cause, there are probably external effects in the form of pest spread impacts and subsequent damages caused. We study such impacts in the case of two producer types: profit-seeking professional producers and utility-seeking hobby producers. We show that the hobby producer, having first set a breeding ground for the pest, under-invests in pest control. We also discuss potential policy instruments to correct this market failure and highlight the importance of considering different stakeholders and their heterogeneous incentives when designing policies to control invasive alien species.

Formulating generalised 'goal games' against nature: An illustration from decision-making under uncertainty in agriculture

The games-against-nature approach to the analysis of uncertainty in decision-making relies on the assumption that the behaviour of a decision-maker can be explained by concepts such as maximin, minimax regret, or a similarly defined criterion. In reality, however, these criteria represent a spectrum and, the actual behaviour of a decision-maker is most likely to embody a mixture of such idealisations. This paper proposes that in game-theoretic approach to decision-making under uncertainty, a more realistic representation of a decision-maker's behaviour can be achieved by synthesising games-against-nature with goal programming into a single framework. The proposed formulation is illustrated by using a well-known example from the literature on mathematical programming models for agricultural-decision-making. (c) 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Considering the normative, systemic and procedural dimensions in indicator-based sustainability assessments in agriculture

This paper develops a framework for evaluating sustainability assessment methods by separately analyzing their normative, systemic and procedural dimensions as suggested by Wiek and Binder [Wiek, A, Binder, C. Solution spaces for decision-making – a sustainability assessment tool for city-regions. Environ Impact Asses Rev 2005, 25: 589-608.]. The framework is then used to characterize indicator-based sustainability assessment methods in agriculture. For a long time, sustainability assessment in agriculture has focused mostly on environmental and technical issues, thus neglecting the economic and, above all, the social aspects of sustainability, the multifunctionality of agriculture and the applicability of the results. In response to these shortcomings, several integrative sustainability assessment methods have been developed for the agricultural sector. This paper reviews seven of these that represent the diversity of tools developed in this area. The reviewed assessment methods can be categorized into three types: (i) top-down farm assessment methods; (ii) top-down regional assessment methods with some stakeholder participation; (iii) bottom-up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods with stakeholder participation throughout the process. The results readily show the trade-offs encountered when selecting an assessment method. A clear, standardized, top-down procedure allows for potentially benchmarking and comparing results across regions and sites. However, this comes at the cost of system specificity. As the top-down methods often have low stakeholder involvement, the application and implementation of the results might be difficult. Our analysis suggests that to include the aspects mentioned above in agricultural sustainability assessment, the bottomup, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary methods are the most suitable ones.

Normative, systemic and procedural aspects: a review of indicator‐based sustainability assessments in agriculture

Several methods for assessing the sustainability of agricultural systems have been developed. These methods do not fully: (i) take into account the multi‐functionality of agriculture; (ii) include multidimensionality; (iii) utilize and implement the assessment knowledge; and (iv) identify conflicting goals and trade‐offs. This paper reviews seven recently developed multidisciplinary indicator‐based assessment methods with respect to their contribution to these shortcomings. All approaches include (1) normative aspects such as goal setting, (2) systemic aspects such as a specification of scale of analysis, (3) a reproducible structure of the approach. The approaches can be categorized into three typologies. The top‐down farm assessments focus on field or farm assessment. They have a clear procedure for measuring the indicators and assessing the sustainability of the system, which allows for benchmarking across farms. The degree of participation is low, potentially affecting the implementation of the results negatively. The top‐down regional assessment assesses the on‐farm and the regional effects. They include some participation to increase acceptance of the results. However, they miss the analysis of potential trade‐offs. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches focus on a regional scale. Stakeholders are included throughout the whole process assuring the acceptance of the results and increasing the probability of implementation of developed measures. As they include the interaction between the indicators in their system representation, they allow for performing a trade‐off analysis. The bottom‐up, integrated participatory or transdisciplinary approaches seem to better overcome the four shortcomings mentioned above.