Multi-criteria and multi-stakeholder assessment of cropping systems for a result-oriented water quality preservation action programme

Land Use Policy

Volumn 42, Issue , 2015, Pages 131-140

  Ravier, Clémence ^a   Prost, Lorène ^b   Jeuffroy, Marie Hélène ^a   Wezel, Alexander ^c   Paravano, Laurette ^d   Reau, Raymond ^a  

^a INRA Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique   (France)

^b UR1326 Sciences en Société   (France)

^c UNIVERSITÉ DE LYON   (France)

^d 14 Bis   (France)

Author keywords

Cropping systems design; Drinking water catchment; Local stakeholders; Multi criteria analysis; Water quality programme

Indexed keywords

CATCHMENT; CROPPING PRACTICE; DRINKING WATER; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT; WATER QUALITY;

EID: 84907480711     PISSN: 02648377     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.07.006     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Agreste Recensement Agricole 2010, Exploitation par orientation technico économique (OTEX), Bourgogne 2010.
2. Arnette A., Zobel C., Bosch D., Pease J., Metcalfe T. Stakeholder ranking of watershed goals with the vector analytic hierarchy process: effects of participant grouping scenarios. Environ. Model. Softw. 2010, 25:1459-1469.
3. Aubertot J.N., Doré T., Ennaifar S., Ferré F., Fourbet J.F., Schneider O. Integrated crop management requires to better take into account cropping systems in epidemiological models. Proceedings of the 9th International Workshop on Plant Disease Epidemiology 2005.
4. Barataud F., Aubry C., Wezel A., Mundler P., Fleury P. Management of water catchment areas in cooperation with agriculture. Experiences from Germany and France. Land Use Policy 2014, 36:585-594.
5. Barnes A.P., Willock J., Hall C., Toma L. Farmer perspectives and practices regarding water pollution control programmes in Scotland. Agric. Water Manag. 2009, 96:1715-1722.
6. Benoît M., Kockmann F. L'organisation des systèmes de culture dans les bassins d'alimentation de captage: innovations, retours d'expériences et leçons à tirer. Ingénieries 2008, 54:19-32.
7. ® model of cropping-system sustainability. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2013, 90:93-98.
8. Bockstaller C., Girardin P., van der Werf H.M.G. Use of agroecological indicators for the evaluation of farming systems. Eur. J. Agron. 1997, 7:261-270.
9. Bockstaller C., Guichard L., Makowski D., Aveline A., Girardin P., Plantureux S. Agri-environmental indicators to assess cropping and farming systems. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2008, 28:139-149.
10. Bockstaller C., Guichard L., Keichinger O., Girardin P., Galan M.B., Gaillard G. Comparison of methods to assess the sustainability of agricultural systems. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 29:223-235.
11. Bohanec M., Messéan A., Scatasta S., Angevin F., Griffiths B., Krogh P.H., Žnidaršič M., Džeroski S. A qualitative multi-attribute model for economic and ecological assessment of genetically modified crops. Ecol. Model. 2008, 215:247-261.
12. Burton R.J.F., Schwarz G. Result-oriented agri-environmental schemes in Europe and their potential for promoting behavioural change. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:628-641.
13. ® 2.0, un outil d'évaluation multicritères pour estimer la contribution des systèmes de culture au développement durable. Innov. Agron. 2012, 35-48.
14. Darradi Y., Saur E., Laplana R., Lescot J.M., Kuentz V., Meyer B.C. Optimizing the environmental performance of agricultural activities: a case study in La Boulouze watershed. Ecol. Indic. 2012, 22:27-37.
15. De Girolamo A.M., Lo Porto A. Land use scenario development as a tool for watershed management within the Rio Mannu Basin. Land Use Policy 2012, 29:691-701.
16. De Sainte Marie C. Rethinking agri-environmental schemes. A result-oriented approach to the management of species-rich grasslands in France. J. Environ. Plan. Manag. 2014, 57(5):704-719.
17. De Stefano L. Facing the water framework directive challenges: a baseline of stakeholder participation in the European Union. J. Environ. Manag. 2010, 91:1332-1340.
18. Duchenes V. Etude "B.A.C" Diagnostic de territoire 2010, Chambre d'Agriculture de l'Yonne, 14 bis rue Guynemer - 89015 Auxerre Cedex.
19. European Parliament, Council of the European Union Directive 2000/60/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 23 October 2000 establishing a framework for Community action in the field of water policy 2000.
20. Garin P., Barraqué B. Why are there so few cooperative agreements between farmers and water services in france? Water policies and the problem of land use rights. Irrig. Drain. 2012, 61:95-105.
21. Gerowitt B., Bertke E., Hespelt et S.-K., Tute C. Towards multifunctional agriculture - weeds as ecological goods?. Weed Res. 2003, 43:227-235.
22. Hajkowicz S.A. Supporting multi-stakeholder environmental decisions. J. Environ. Manag. 2008, 88:607-614.
23. Hasund K.P. Indicator-based agri-environmental payments: a payment-by-result model for public goods with a Swedish application. Land Use Policy 2013, 30:223-233.
24. Hébert J. La fumure azotée du blé tendre d'hiver. Bull. Tech. d'Information 1969, 244:755-766.
25. Hénin S. Rapport du groupe de travail; activités agricoles et qualité des eaux 1980, Ministère de l'Agriculture, Ministère de l'environnement et de la qualité de vie.
26. Howarth W. Diffuse water pollution and diffuse environmental laws tackling diffuse water pollution in England, Report by the Comptroller and Auditor General, HC 186 Session 2010-2011, 6 July 2010. J. Environ. Law 2011, 23:129-141.
27. Kerselaers E., Rogge E., Vanempten E., Lauwers L., Van Huylenbroeck G. Changing land use in the countryside: stakeholders' perception of the ongoing rural planning process in Flanders. Land Use Policy 2013, 32:197-206.
28. Klerkx L., Aarts N., Leeuwis C. Adaptive management in agricultural in innovation systems: the interactions between innovation networks and their environment. Agric. Syst. 2010, 103:90-400.
29. Kuhfuss L., Jacquet F., Préget R., Thoyer S. Le dispositif des MAEt: une fausse bonne idée?. Rev. d'Etude Agric. Environ. 2012, 93(4):395-411.
30. Laurent F., Ruelland D. Assessing impacts of alternative land use and agricultural practices on nitrate pollution at the catchment scale. J. Hydrol. 2011, 409:440-450.
31. Luyet V., Schlaepfer R., Parlange M.B., Buttler A. A framework to implement stakeholder participation in environmental projects. J. Environ. Manag. 2012, 111:213-219.
32. Mary B., Beaudoin N., Benoit M. Prévention de la pollution nitrique à l'échelle du bassin d'alimentation en eau. Maîtrise de l'azote dans les agroecosystèmes 1997, 289-312. Ed. Quae, Paris. G.J. Lemaire, B. Nicolardot (Eds.).
33. Matzdorf B., Lorenz J. How cost-effective are result-oriented agri-environmental measures?-an empirical analysis in Germany. Land Use Policy 2010, 27:535-544.
34. Melland A.R., Mellander P.-E., Murphy P.N.C., Wall D.P., Mechan S., Shine O., Shortle G., Jordan P. Stream water quality in intensive cereal cropping catchments with regulated nutrient management. Environ. Sci. Policy 2012, 24:58-70.
35. Mettepenningen E., Vandermeulen V., Delaet K., Van Huylenbroeck G., Wailes E.J. Investigating the influence of the institutional organization of agri-environmental schemes on scheme adoption. Land Use Policy 2013, 33:20-30.
36. Panno S., Kelly W. Nitrate and herbicide loading in two groundwater basins of Illinois' sinkhole plain. J. Hydrol. 2004, 290:229-242.
37. Paravano L. Etude "B.A.C" Diagnostic des pratiques 2010, Chambre d'Agriculture de l'Yonne, 14 bis rue Guynemer - 89015 Auxerre Cedex.
38. Parra-López C., Calatrava-Requena J., de-Haro-Giménez T. A systemic comparative assessment of the multifunctional performance of alternative olive systems in Spain within an AHP-extended framework. Ecol. Econ. 2008, 64:820-834.
39. R Development Core Team R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing 2008, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, Available at: http://www.R-project.org (verified 28.11.08).
40. Reau R., Monnot L.A., Schaub A., Munier-Jolain N., Pambou I., Bockstaller C., Cariolle M., Chabert A., Dumans P. Les ateliers de conception de systèmes de culture pour construire, évaluer et identifier des prototypes prometteurs. Innov. Agron. 2012, 20:5-33. http://www7.inra.fr/ciag/revue/volume_20_juillet_2012.
41. Reed M.S. Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol. Conserv. 2008, 141:2417-2431.
42. Saarikoski H., Mustajoki J., Marttunen M. Participatory multi-criteria assessment as 'opening up' vs. 'closing down' of policy discourses: a case of old-growth forest conflict in Finnish Upper Lapland. Land Use Policy 2013, 32:329-336.
43. Sabatier R., Doyen L., Tichit M. Action versus result-oriented schemes in a grassland agroecosystem: a dynamic modelling approach. PLoS ONE 2012, 7:e33257.
44. Sadok W., Angevin F., Bergez J.E., Bockstaller C., Colomb B., Guichard L., Reau R., Doré T. Ex ante assessment of the sustainability of alternative cropping systems: implications for using multi-criteria decision-aid methods. A review. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2008, 28:163-174.
45. ®, a qualitative multi-attribute decision model for ex ante assessment of the sustainability of cropping systems. Agron. Sustain. Dev. 2009, 29:447-461.
46. Schwarz G., Moxey A., McCracken D., Huband S., Cummins R. An analysis of the potential effectiveness of a Payment-by-Results approach to the delivery of environmental public goods and services supplied by Agri-Environment Schemes. Report to the Land Use Policy Group, UK 2008, Macaulay Institute, Pareto Consulting and Scottish Agricultural College, 108 pp.
47. Strager M.P., Rosenberger R.S. Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: weights and measures in spatial MCA. Ecol. Econ. 2006, 57:627-639.
48. Worrall F., Spencer E., Burt T.P. The effectiveness of nitrate vulnerable zones for limiting surface water nitrate concentrations. J. Hydrol. 2009, 370:21-28.