![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
"Integrated farming and
indicators
Following the OECD classification of indicators in "driving force", "state" and "response" indicators, the current approaches in agriculture research focus mainly on "driving force" and "state" indicators, whereas "response" indicators are used to a smaller extend. The second step is to develop a complete system of indicators. This is necessary, because the different indicators are interrelated and therefore the relation between the different indicators has implications for the interpretation of the results. In general, the following other requirements for an evaluation of indicator sets are important :
In order to draw
scientifically sound conclusions, the consideration of the interactions
between indicators is a crucial point. One example: In the case the
indicator nitrogen balance gives a high positive result, the consequences of
such a finding without interactions would be to lower the nitrogen
fertilization. This might be a completely wrong conclusion because a high
positive nitrogen balance might weil be caused by a suboptimal application
of pesticides and a low yield for that reason. The consequence in this case
would be not to lower the nitrogen fertilization, but to improve the
pesticide management. Another very important classification, which relates
closely to the example mentioned above is the actual target of a
indicatorsystem. An indicatorsystem designed to control or to administer
payments etc. might be very simple and complex considerations like
interactions between single indicators seem to be unimportant, although
conclusions might be wrong. If, however, the optimisation of husbandry,
fertilizer or pesticide management on the farm level is the target, those
interactions must be considered. O. CHRISTEN
|
|