IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/agisys/v143y2016icp114-125.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Is there a future for organic production in high ecological value ecosystems?

Author

Listed:
  • Horrillo, A.
  • Escribano, M.
  • Mesias, F.J.
  • Elghannam, A.
  • Gaspar, P.

Abstract

Dehesas (rangelands typically located in the Southwest of Spain) are agro-silvo-pastoral systems traditionally used in agriculture and livestock farming, where livestock uses large pasturelands in wooded regions. These systems stand out for their high environmental and socio-economic value, where livestock farming plays an essential role in their maintenance and conservation. The dehesa is located in the SW quadrant of the Iberian Peninsula, occupying a total area of 5.8 million hectares in Spain and 0.5 million hectares in Portugal.

Suggested Citation

  • Horrillo, A. & Escribano, M. & Mesias, F.J. & Elghannam, A. & Gaspar, P., 2016. "Is there a future for organic production in high ecological value ecosystems?," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 143(C), pages 114-125.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:143:y:2016:i:c:p:114-125
    DOI: 10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.015
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0308521X15300731
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.agsy.2015.12.015?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gillespie, Jeffrey & Nehring, Richard, 2013. "Comparing economic performance of organic and conventional U.S. beef farms using matching samples," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 57(2), pages 1-15.
    2. Alcon, Francisco & Tapsuwan, Sorada & Martínez-Paz, José M. & Brouwer, Roy & de Miguel, María D., 2014. "Forecasting deficit irrigation adoption using a mixed stakeholder assessment methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 183-193.
    3. Landeta, Jon & Barrutia, Jon, 2011. "People consultation to construct the future: A Delphi application," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 134-151, January.
    4. Marija Banović & Magda Aguiar Fontes & Maria Madalena Barreira & Klaus G. Grunert, 2012. "Impact of Product Familiarity on Beef Quality Perception," Agribusiness, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(2), pages 157-172, March.
    5. Tanure, Soraya & Nabinger, Carlos & Becker, João Luiz, 2013. "Bioeconomic model of decision support system for farm management. Part I: Systemic conceptual modeling," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 115(C), pages 104-116.
    6. Landeta, Jon & Barrutia, Jon, 2011. "People consultation to construct the future: A Delphi application," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 134-151.
    7. Wentholt, M.T.A. & Rowe, G. & König, A. & Marvin, H.J.P. & Frewer, L.J., 2009. "The views of key stakeholders on an evolving food risk governance framework: Results from a Delphi study," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 34(6), pages 539-548, December.
    8. Busse, M. & Schwerdtner, W. & Siebert, R. & Doernberg, A. & Kuntosch, A. & König, B. & Bokelmann, W., 2015. "Analysis of animal monitoring technologies in Germany from an innovation system perspective," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 138(C), pages 55-65.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Cipriano Díaz-Gaona & Manuel Sánchez-Rodríguez & Thais Rucabado-Palomar & Vicente Rodríguez-Estévez, 2019. "A Typological Characterization of Organic Livestock Farms in the Natural Park Sierra de Grazalema Based on Technical and Economic Variables," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(21), pages 1-18, October.
    2. Abreu I. & Mesias F. J. & Ramajo & J, 2021. "Design and validation of an index to measure development in rural areas through stakeholder participation," Papers 2109.12568, arXiv.org.
    3. Feliu López-i-Gelats & Jordi Bartolomé Filella, 2020. "Examining the role of organic production schemes in Mediterranean pastoralism," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 22(6), pages 5771-5792, August.
    4. Camila Fritzen Cidón & Paola Schmitt Figueiró & Dusan Schreiber, 2021. "Benefits of Organic Agriculture under the Perspective of the Bioeconomy: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-19, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alyami, Saleh. H. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2013. "Developing sustainable building assessment scheme for Saudi Arabia: Delphi consultation approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 43-54.
    2. Kattirtzi, Michael & Winskel, Mark, 2020. "When experts disagree: Using the Policy Delphi method to analyse divergent expert expectations and preferences on UK energy futures," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    3. Isabela Caroline de Sousa & Tiago F. A. C. Sigahi & Izabela Simon Rampasso & Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes & Walter Leal Filho & João Henrique Paulino Pires Eustachio & Rosley Anholon, 2024. "A Delphi–Fuzzy Delphi Study on SDGs 9 and 12 after COVID-19: Case Study in Brazil," Forecasting, MDPI, vol. 6(3), pages 1-18, July.
    4. Aldossary, Naief A. & Rezgui, Yacine & Kwan, Alan, 2015. "Consensus-based low carbon domestic design framework for sustainable homes," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 51(C), pages 417-432.
    5. Belton, Ian & MacDonald, Alice & Wright, George & Hamlin, Iain, 2019. "Improving the practical application of the Delphi method in group-based judgment: A six-step prescription for a well-founded and defensible process," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 147(C), pages 72-82.
    6. Förster, Bernadette & von der Gracht, Heiko, 2014. "Assessing Delphi panel composition for strategic foresight — A comparison of panels based on company-internal and external participants," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 84(C), pages 215-229.
    7. Sebastian Hinderer & Leif Brändle & Andreas Kuckertz, 2021. "Transition to a Sustainable Bioeconomy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(15), pages 1-16, July.
    8. Barrios, Maite & Guilera, Georgina & Nuño, Laura & Gómez-Benito, Juana, 2021. "Consensus in the delphi method: What makes a decision change?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Wright, George & Rowe, Gene, 2011. "Group-based judgmental forecasting: An integration of extant knowledge and the development of priorities for a new research agenda," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 27(1), pages 1-13, January.
    10. Winkler, Jens & Kuklinski, Christian Paul Jian-Wei & Moser, Roger, 2015. "Decision making in emerging markets: The Delphi approach's contribution to coping with uncertainty and equivocality," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 68(5), pages 1118-1126.
    11. Spickermann, Alexander & Zimmermann, Martin & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "Surface- and deep-level diversity in panel selection — Exploring diversity effects on response behaviour in foresight," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 105-120.
    12. Meijering, Jurian V. & Tobi, Hilde, 2016. "The effect of controlled opinion feedback on Delphi features: Mixed messages from a real-world Delphi experiment," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 166-173.
    13. repec:eee:intfor:v:27:y:2011:i:1:p:1-13 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Engelke, Henning & Mauksch, Stefanie & Darkow, Inga-Lena & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2015. "Opportunities for social enterprise in Germany — Evidence from an expert survey," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 90(PB), pages 635-646.
    15. Marco van Gelderen & Johan Wiklund & Jeffery S. McMullen, 2021. "Entrepreneurship in the Future: A Delphi Study of ETP and JBV Editorial Board Members," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 45(5), pages 1239-1275, September.
    16. Winkler, Jens & Moser, Roger, 2016. "Biases in future-oriented Delphi studies: A cognitive perspective," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 63-76.
    17. Haidar, Ali & Guimón, José & Alon, Ido, 2024. "Can graphene fuel a transformative change in energy storage technologies? A scenario analysis for the next two decades," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 202(C).
    18. Rengarajan, Srinath & Moser, Roger & Narayanamurthy, Gopalakrishnan, 2021. "Strategy tools in dynamic environments – An expert-panel study," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 165(C).
    19. Spickermann, Alexander & Grienitz, Volker & von der Gracht, Heiko A., 2014. "Heading towards a multimodal city of the future?," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 201-221.
    20. Jon Landeta & Aitziber Lertxundi, 2024. "Quality indicators for Delphi studies," Futures & Foresight Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 6(1), March.
    21. Alcon, Francisco & Tapsuwan, Sorada & Martínez-Paz, José M. & Brouwer, Roy & de Miguel, María D., 2014. "Forecasting deficit irrigation adoption using a mixed stakeholder assessment methodology," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 183-193.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:agisys:v:143:y:2016:i:c:p:114-125. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.