Integrating Global Comparability and National Specificity in Agricultural Sustainability Indicators Through Stakeholder-Science Co-Evaluation in Austria

C. Folberth, F. Sinabell, T. Schinko, S. Hanger-Kopp, S. Lappöhn, H. Mitter, T. Sandén, E. Süssenbacher
{"title":"Integrating Global Comparability and National Specificity in Agricultural Sustainability Indicators Through Stakeholder-Science Co-Evaluation in Austria","authors":"C. Folberth,&nbsp;F. Sinabell,&nbsp;T. Schinko,&nbsp;S. Hanger-Kopp,&nbsp;S. Lappöhn,&nbsp;H. Mitter,&nbsp;T. Sandén,&nbsp;E. Süssenbacher","doi":"10.1029/2024CSJ000092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Agriculture is central to sustainable development both from provisioning and pressure perspectives. It is hence imperative to measure its diverse outcomes, for which various global indicator systems have been developed. Yet, these come with trade-offs, for example, between comparability among countries versus specificity to national context. This poses the question how relevant generic indicators are for national stakeholders and how specific information requirements can be integrated within a globally comparable assessment. Herein, we present the co-evaluation of an existing system of global agricultural sustainability indicators with national stakeholders from agricultural practice, research and education, public administration, private sector, and NGOs in Austria, representing an expert community. Focusing on the relevance of the indicators and the requirements for complementary metrics, we found that particularly social themes and related indicators were highly specific to the national context, followed by economic and environmental aspects. Co-interpretation of selected indicator trajectories showed that drivers and interactions were highly complex and may change over time, emphasizing also the importance of complementary contextual information. Yet, availability of data to measure indicators proposed by stakeholders remains a key limitation to the adaptation of the indicator system. We outline two options for improving the relevance of the global indicator system: (a) substituting less relevant indicators or (b) introducing a second tier covering regionally important aspects. To explore which of the two options is most appropriate across geographies and whether unified approaches to such a regionalization are indeed feasible, we propose to include the co-creation of regionalized indicator frameworks in future iterations across agriculturally diverse countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":93639,"journal":{"name":"Community science","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1029/2024CSJ000092","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Community science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1029/2024CSJ000092","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Agriculture is central to sustainable development both from provisioning and pressure perspectives. It is hence imperative to measure its diverse outcomes, for which various global indicator systems have been developed. Yet, these come with trade-offs, for example, between comparability among countries versus specificity to national context. This poses the question how relevant generic indicators are for national stakeholders and how specific information requirements can be integrated within a globally comparable assessment. Herein, we present the co-evaluation of an existing system of global agricultural sustainability indicators with national stakeholders from agricultural practice, research and education, public administration, private sector, and NGOs in Austria, representing an expert community. Focusing on the relevance of the indicators and the requirements for complementary metrics, we found that particularly social themes and related indicators were highly specific to the national context, followed by economic and environmental aspects. Co-interpretation of selected indicator trajectories showed that drivers and interactions were highly complex and may change over time, emphasizing also the importance of complementary contextual information. Yet, availability of data to measure indicators proposed by stakeholders remains a key limitation to the adaptation of the indicator system. We outline two options for improving the relevance of the global indicator system: (a) substituting less relevant indicators or (b) introducing a second tier covering regionally important aspects. To explore which of the two options is most appropriate across geographies and whether unified approaches to such a regionalization are indeed feasible, we propose to include the co-creation of regionalized indicator frameworks in future iterations across agriculturally diverse countries.

Abstract Image

通过奥地利利益相关者-科学共同评价整合农业可持续性指标的全球可比性和国家特殊性
从供给和压力的角度来看,农业都是可持续发展的核心。因此,必须衡量其多样化的成果,为此制定了各种全球指标体系。然而,这些都伴随着权衡,例如,在国家之间的可比性与国家背景的特殊性之间。这就提出了一个问题,即一般指标对国家利益攸关方的相关性如何,具体信息需求如何纳入全球可比评估。在此,我们与奥地利的农业实践、研究和教育、公共管理、私营部门和非政府组织的国家利益相关者共同评估了现有的全球农业可持续性指标体系,代表了一个专家社区。重点关注指标的相关性和对补充指标的要求,我们发现,特别是社会主题和相关指标高度具体到国家背景,其次是经济和环境方面。对选定指标轨迹的共同解释表明,驱动因素和相互作用非常复杂,可能会随着时间的推移而变化,这也强调了补充背景信息的重要性。然而,衡量利益攸关方提出的指标的数据可用性仍然是调整指标体系的一个关键限制。我们概述了改善全球指标体系相关性的两种选择:(a)取代相关性较低的指标,或(b)引入涵盖区域重要方面的第二层指标。为了探索这两种选择中哪一种最适合跨地域,以及统一的地区化方法是否确实可行,我们建议在农业多样化国家的未来迭代中包括共同创建区域化指标框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信