IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i10p6334-d821698.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainability Assessment of Family Agricultural Properties: The Importance of Homeopathy

Author

Listed:
  • Claudio Cordoba Correoso

    (Postgraduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Lages 88520-000, SC, Brazil
    Instituto de Innovación Agropecuaria de Panamá (IDIAP), Panama City 500-0519, Panama)

  • Feni Agostinho

    (Postgraduate Program in Production Engineering, Universidade Paulista (UNIP), São Paulo 04043-200, SP, Brazil)

  • James Rodrigo Smaniotto

    (Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária e Extensão Rural de Santa Catarina, Lages 89560-000, SC, Brazil)

  • Mari Carissimi Boff

    (Postgraduate Program in Plant Production, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina (UDESC), Lages 88520-000, SC, Brazil)

  • Pedro Boff

    (Empresa de Pesquisa Agropecuária e Extensão Rural de Santa Catarina, Lages 89560-000, SC, Brazil)

Abstract

Family farming is a lifestyle and agricultural base that has ensured food for the world’s growing population in addition to the family’s own subsistence. However, the intensification of production processes to primarily generate exportable surpluses is based on the constant input of industrial inputs of low local socioeconomic viability. This study aims to evaluate the sustainability of family farms and their impact on the adoption of homeopathy instead of traditional/conventional intensification techniques. The study was conducted at six family farms located in the Serrana Mesoregion, Santa Catarina, Brazil, and include farms were classified according to the management and representativeness of their agricultural activity, i.e., conventional grains-cattle, milk-grains, grains and diversified, and according to their ecological basis, i.e., agroecological and organic. To discuss the sustainability of the family farms that were evaluated, the of metrics emergy synthesis, ecotoxicity potential and socioeconomic indicators are used. The results indicate that conventional diversified property has the best overall performance with regard to sustainability, including emergy yield ratio (EYR 1.88), emergy investment ratio (EIR 1.13), return on assets (1.22), hourly income of work (36.6 BRL/h) and income sufficiency (3.3). Agroecological and organic properties have better performance in renewability (76% and 75%), environmental load (ELR = 0.32 and 0.34), sustainability (ESI = 4.78 and 3.5) and potential ecotoxicity (1.736 and 1.579 kg 1.4 DCB-eq/ha). The contribution of homeopathy in an alternative scenario results in a 19% reduction in nonrenewable flows in conventional management properties and a decrease of up to 91% in ecotoxicity in grain + cattle properties. Using homeopathy, the return on assets and profit margin can be increased by up to 43% and income per hour of work and income sufficiency can be increased by 20% and 16%, respectively. This study contributes to discussions about the importance of using homeopathic therapies as a viable strategy that can be used in strategic public policy plans to improve the sustainability of family farms.

Suggested Citation

  • Claudio Cordoba Correoso & Feni Agostinho & James Rodrigo Smaniotto & Mari Carissimi Boff & Pedro Boff, 2022. "Sustainability Assessment of Family Agricultural Properties: The Importance of Homeopathy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(10), pages 1-22, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6334-:d:821698
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6334/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/10/6334/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Agostinho, Feni & Ortega, Enrique, 2012. "Integrated food, energy and environmental services production as an alternative for small rural properties in Brazil," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 37(1), pages 103-114.
    2. Mads V. Markussen & Michal Kulak & Laurence G. Smith & Thomas Nemecek & Hanne Østergård, 2014. "Evaluating the Sustainability of a Small-Scale Low-Input Organic Vegetable Supply System in the United Kingdom," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(4), pages 1-33, April.
    3. Brown, Mark T. & Protano, Gaetano & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2011. "Assessing geobiosphere work of generating global reserves of coal, crude oil, and natural gas," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(3), pages 879-887.
    4. Orlando, Francesca & Alali, Sumer & Vaglia, Valentina & Pagliarino, Elena & Bacenetti, Jacopo & Bocchi, Stefano & Bocchi, Stefano, 2020. "Participatory approach for developing knowledge on organic rice farming: Management strategies and productive performance," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    5. Agostinho, F. & Oliveira, M.W. & Pulselli, F.M. & Almeida, C.M.V.B. & Giannetti, B.F., 2019. "Emergy accounting as a support for a strategic planning towards a regional sustainable milk production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    6. Agostinho, Feni & Diniz, Guaraci & Siche, Raúl & Ortega, Enrique, 2008. "The use of emergy assessment and the Geographical Information System in the diagnosis of small family farms in Brazil," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 210(1), pages 37-57.
    7. Pulselli, Federico M. & Coscieme, Luca & Bastianoni, Simone, 2011. "Ecosystem services as a counterpart of emergy flows to ecosystems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(16), pages 2924-2928.
    8. Giannetti, Biagio F. & Faria, Luciana & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Agostinho, Feni & Coscieme, Luca & Liu, Gengyuan, 2018. "Human-nature nexuses in Brazil: Monitoring production of economic and ecosystem services in historical series," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 30(PB), pages 248-256.
    9. Brown, Mark T. & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2016. "Assessing the global environmental sources driving the geobiosphere: A revised emergy baseline," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 339(C), pages 126-132.
    10. Rasul, Golam & Thapa, Gopal B., 2004. "Sustainability of ecological and conventional agricultural systems in Bangladesh: an assessment based on environmental, economic and social perspectives," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 79(3), pages 327-351, March.
    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. Clasen, Arno P. & Agostinho, Feni & Sulis, Federico & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2024. "Unlocking the potential of municipal solid waste: Emergy accounting applied in a novel biorefinery," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 492(C).

    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. Agostinho, F. & Oliveira, M.W. & Pulselli, F.M. & Almeida, C.M.V.B. & Giannetti, B.F., 2019. "Emergy accounting as a support for a strategic planning towards a regional sustainable milk production," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    2. Tamara Fonseca & Wagner C. Valenti & Biagio F. Giannetti & Fernando H. Gonçalves & Feni Agostinho, 2022. "Environmental Accounting of the Yellow-Tail Lambari Aquaculture: Sustainability of Rural Freshwater Pond Systems," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Di Salvo, André L.A. & Agostinho, Feni & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2017. "Can cloud computing be labeled as “green”? Insights under an environmental accounting perspective," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 514-526.
    4. Wright, Christina & Østergård, Hanne, 2015. "Scales of renewability exemplified by a case study of three Danish pig production systems," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 315(C), pages 28-36.
    5. Yang, Qing & Liu, Gengyuan & Casazza, Marco & Campbell, Elliot T. & Giannetti, Biagio F. & Brown, Mark T., 2018. "Development of a new framework for non-monetary accounting on ecosystem services valuation," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 34(PA), pages 37-54.
    6. Agostinho, Feni & Almeida, Cecília M.V.B. & Bonilla, Silvia H. & Sacomano, José B. & Giannetti, Biagio F., 2013. "Urban solid waste plant treatment in Brazil: Is there a net emergy yield on the recovered materials?," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 143-155.
    7. Vitória Toffolo Luiz & Rafael Araújo Nacimento & Vanessa Theodoro Rezende & Taynara Freitas Avelar de Almeida & Juliana Vieira Paz & Biagio Fernando Giannetti & Augusto Hauber Gameiro, 2023. "Sustainability Assessment of Intensification Levels of Brazilian Smallholder Integrated Dairy-Crop Production Systems: An Emergy and Economic-Based Decision Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-20, March.
    8. Wu, Xihui & Wu, Faqi & Tong, Xiaogang & Wu, Jia & Sun, Lu & Peng, Xiaoyu, 2015. "Emergy and greenhouse gas assessment of a sustainable, integrated agricultural model (SIAM) for plant, animal and biogas production: Analysis of the ecological recycle of wastes," Resources, Conservation & Recycling, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 40-50.
    9. Cristiano, S. & Ulgiati, S. & Gonella, F., 2021. "Systemic sustainability and resilience assessment of health systems, addressing global societal priorities: Learnings from a top nonprofit hospital in a bioclimatic building in Africa," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 141(C).
    10. Evariste Rutebuka & Lixiao Zhang & Ernest Frimpong Asamoah & Mingyue Pang & Emmanuel Rukundo, 2018. "Resource Dynamism of the Rwandan Economy: An Emergy Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-19, May.
    11. Mattei, F. & Buonocore, E. & Franzese, P.P. & Scardi, M., 2021. "Global assessment of marine phytoplankton primary production: Integrating machine learning and environmental accounting models," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 451(C).
    12. Scarpelin, Juliano & Agostinho, Feni Dalano Roosevelt & de Almeida, Cecília Maria Villas Bôas & Giannetti, Biagio Fernando & Dias, Lívia Cristina Pinto, 2022. "Valuation of losses and damages resulting from the Fundão's dam failure: An emergy perspective," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 471(C).
    13. Ferraro, D.O. & Benzi, P., 2015. "A long-term sustainability assessment of an Argentinian agricultural system based on emergy synthesis," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 306(C), pages 121-129.
    14. Liu, Conghu & Cai, Wei & Dinolov, Ognyan & Zhang, Cuixia & Rao, Weizhen & Jia, Shun & Li, Li & Chan, Felix T.S., 2018. "Emergy based sustainability evaluation of remanufacturing machining systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 150(C), pages 670-680.
    15. Duian Lu & Jie Cheng & Zhenzhou Feng & Li Sun & Wei Mo & Degang Wang, 2022. "Emergy Synthesis of Two Oyster Aquaculture Systems in Zhejiang Province, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(21), pages 1-20, October.
    16. Oliveira, M. & Zucaro, A. & Santagata, R. & Ulgiati, S., 2022. "Environmental assessment of milk production from local to regional scales," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 463(C).
    17. Ana Carolina V. Nadalini & Ricardo de Araujo Kalid & Ednildo Andrade Torres, 2021. "Emergy as a Tool to Evaluate Ecosystem Services: A Systematic Review of the Literature," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-14, June.
    18. Pulselli, Federico M. & Patrizi, Nicoletta & Focardi, Silvia, 2011. "Calculation of the unit emergy value of water in an Italian watershed," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 222(16), pages 2929-2938.
    19. Pang, Mingyue & Zhang, Lixiao & Ulgiati, Sergio & Wang, Changbo, 2015. "Ecological impacts of small hydropower in China: Insights from an emergy analysis of a case plant," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 112-122.
    20. Oliveira, Mariana & Cocozza, Annalisa & Zucaro, Amalia & Santagata, Remo & Ulgiati, Sergio, 2021. "Circular economy in the agro-industry: Integrated environmental assessment of dairy products," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 148(C).

    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:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:10:p:6334-:d:821698. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.