Limits...
Sustainable Sourcing of Global Agricultural Raw Materials: Assessing Gaps in Key Impact and Vulnerability Issues and Indicators.

Springer NP, Garbach K, Guillozet K, Haden VR, Hedao P, Hollander AD, Huber PR, Ingersoll C, Langner M, Lipari G, Mohammadi Y, Musker R, Piatto M, Riggle C, Schweisguth M, Sin E, Snider S, Vidic N, White A, Brodt S, Quinn JF, Tomich TP - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: These issues are then associated with over 2,000 sustainability indicators gathered from existing sources.This process results in 44 "integrated" issues--24 impact issues and 36 vulnerability issues--that are composed of 318 "component" issues.Issues in the impact framework generally have fewer gaps than those in the vulnerability framework.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Agricultural Sustainability Institute, University of California Davis, Davis, California, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
Understanding how to source agricultural raw materials sustainably is challenging in today's globalized food system given the variety of issues to be considered and the multitude of suggested indicators for representing these issues. Furthermore, stakeholders in the global food system both impact these issues and are themselves vulnerable to these issues, an important duality that is often implied but not explicitly described. The attention given to these issues and conceptual frameworks varies greatly--depending largely on the stakeholder perspective--as does the set of indicators developed to measure them. To better structure these complex relationships and assess any gaps, we collate a comprehensive list of sustainability issues and a database of sustainability indicators to represent them. To assure a breadth of inclusion, the issues are pulled from the following three perspectives: major global sustainability assessments, sustainability communications from global food companies, and conceptual frameworks of sustainable livelihoods from academic publications. These terms are integrated across perspectives using a common vocabulary, classified by their relevance to impacts and vulnerabilities, and categorized into groups by economic, environmental, physical, human, social, and political characteristics. These issues are then associated with over 2,000 sustainability indicators gathered from existing sources. A gap analysis is then performed to determine if particular issues and issue groups are over or underrepresented. This process results in 44 "integrated" issues--24 impact issues and 36 vulnerability issues--that are composed of 318 "component" issues. The gap analysis shows that although every integrated issue is mentioned at least 40% of the time across perspectives, no issue is mentioned more than 70% of the time. A few issues infrequently mentioned across perspectives also have relatively few indicators available to fully represent them. Issues in the impact framework generally have fewer gaps than those in the vulnerability framework.

No MeSH data available.


Average number of indicators per component issue (by integrated issue).A lower average suggests a lack of indicators available to fully cover a given integrated issue. Integrated issues with fewer than two indicators (on average) per component issue are highlighted in red. This threshold of two indicators (on average) per component issue is notated by the dotted line.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4465747&req=5

pone.0128752.g007: Average number of indicators per component issue (by integrated issue).A lower average suggests a lack of indicators available to fully cover a given integrated issue. Integrated issues with fewer than two indicators (on average) per component issue are highlighted in red. This threshold of two indicators (on average) per component issue is notated by the dotted line.

Mentions: The average number of related indicators per component issue (Fig 7) gives a clearer picture of indicator gaps for each integrated issue. The four integrated issues with the most missing component issues in Fig 6 (including the Social Structure) also have some of the lowest indicator averages in Fig 7. Some additional integrated issues also have low indicator averages: Literacy, Participation, Property Rights, Women & Wages, and Women’s Participation all have (on average) less than two related indicators for every component issue. Only in Fig 7 do the gaps for these latter five issues become noticeable since they all have low numbers of both related indicators and component issues.


Sustainable Sourcing of Global Agricultural Raw Materials: Assessing Gaps in Key Impact and Vulnerability Issues and Indicators.

Springer NP, Garbach K, Guillozet K, Haden VR, Hedao P, Hollander AD, Huber PR, Ingersoll C, Langner M, Lipari G, Mohammadi Y, Musker R, Piatto M, Riggle C, Schweisguth M, Sin E, Snider S, Vidic N, White A, Brodt S, Quinn JF, Tomich TP - PLoS ONE (2015)

Average number of indicators per component issue (by integrated issue).A lower average suggests a lack of indicators available to fully cover a given integrated issue. Integrated issues with fewer than two indicators (on average) per component issue are highlighted in red. This threshold of two indicators (on average) per component issue is notated by the dotted line.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4465747&req=5

pone.0128752.g007: Average number of indicators per component issue (by integrated issue).A lower average suggests a lack of indicators available to fully cover a given integrated issue. Integrated issues with fewer than two indicators (on average) per component issue are highlighted in red. This threshold of two indicators (on average) per component issue is notated by the dotted line.
Mentions: The average number of related indicators per component issue (Fig 7) gives a clearer picture of indicator gaps for each integrated issue. The four integrated issues with the most missing component issues in Fig 6 (including the Social Structure) also have some of the lowest indicator averages in Fig 7. Some additional integrated issues also have low indicator averages: Literacy, Participation, Property Rights, Women & Wages, and Women’s Participation all have (on average) less than two related indicators for every component issue. Only in Fig 7 do the gaps for these latter five issues become noticeable since they all have low numbers of both related indicators and component issues.

Bottom Line: These issues are then associated with over 2,000 sustainability indicators gathered from existing sources.This process results in 44 "integrated" issues--24 impact issues and 36 vulnerability issues--that are composed of 318 "component" issues.Issues in the impact framework generally have fewer gaps than those in the vulnerability framework.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Agricultural Sustainability Institute, University of California Davis, Davis, California, United States of America.

ABSTRACT
Understanding how to source agricultural raw materials sustainably is challenging in today's globalized food system given the variety of issues to be considered and the multitude of suggested indicators for representing these issues. Furthermore, stakeholders in the global food system both impact these issues and are themselves vulnerable to these issues, an important duality that is often implied but not explicitly described. The attention given to these issues and conceptual frameworks varies greatly--depending largely on the stakeholder perspective--as does the set of indicators developed to measure them. To better structure these complex relationships and assess any gaps, we collate a comprehensive list of sustainability issues and a database of sustainability indicators to represent them. To assure a breadth of inclusion, the issues are pulled from the following three perspectives: major global sustainability assessments, sustainability communications from global food companies, and conceptual frameworks of sustainable livelihoods from academic publications. These terms are integrated across perspectives using a common vocabulary, classified by their relevance to impacts and vulnerabilities, and categorized into groups by economic, environmental, physical, human, social, and political characteristics. These issues are then associated with over 2,000 sustainability indicators gathered from existing sources. A gap analysis is then performed to determine if particular issues and issue groups are over or underrepresented. This process results in 44 "integrated" issues--24 impact issues and 36 vulnerability issues--that are composed of 318 "component" issues. The gap analysis shows that although every integrated issue is mentioned at least 40% of the time across perspectives, no issue is mentioned more than 70% of the time. A few issues infrequently mentioned across perspectives also have relatively few indicators available to fully represent them. Issues in the impact framework generally have fewer gaps than those in the vulnerability framework.

No MeSH data available.