Evaluation of Sustainability of Maize Cultivation in Poland. A Prospect Theory—PROMETHEE Approach
PBN-AR
Instytucja
Instytut Uprawy Nawożenia i Gleboznawstwa - Państwowy Instytut Badawczy
Informacje podstawowe
Główny język publikacji
angielski
Czasopismo
Sustainability (20pkt w roku publikacji)
ISSN
EISSN
2071-1050
Wydawca
MDPI (Multidisciplinary Digital Publishing Institute)
DOI
URL
Rok publikacji
2018
Numer zeszytu
11
Strony od-do
1-19
Numer tomu
10
Identyfikator DOI
Liczba arkuszy
Autorzy
Pozostali autorzy
+ 1
Słowa kluczowe
angielski
maize
tillage systems
multiple-criteria decision analysis
PROMETHEE
prospect theory
Streszczenia
Język
angielski
Treść
This study aims at exploiting research outcomes concerning tillage practices in order to make solutions available to farmers to mitigate negative environmental impact to soils. Two alternative practices have been analysed against conventional full tillage based on data provided by a long-term experiment conducted at the Institute of Soil Science and Plant Cultivation (IUNG) farm in Grabów, Central Poland. Reduced Tillage and Direct Sowing are evaluated against Full Tillage on the basis of socio-economic and environmental criteria. Multi-criteria decision analysis undertaken using the PROMETHEE method provided evidence that the ‘optimal’ maize cultivation system depends on the decision maker’s viewpoint and preferences. In fact, criteria selected and related weights elicited from representative farmers, as well as from an expert agronomist, reveal different viewpoints. Direct sowing was the most preferable for the large farm and expert perspective, whereas in case of small farm reduced tillage ranked first. Prospect theory developed by behavioural economists was incorporated to take into account decision biases. As a matter of fact, based on Prospect Theory-PROMETHEE from the small farm and the expert perspective, the conventional system was now ranked first, while for the large farm, the most preferable practice was still direct sowing.
Inne
System-identifier
PX-5ce3aa3fd5de2860420356c4
CrossrefMetadata from Crossref logo
Cytowania
Liczba prac cytujących tę pracę
Brak danych
Referencje
Liczba prac cytowanych przez tę pracę
Brak danych