IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v15y2022i1p779-d1021910.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Effect of Farm Size on Sustainability Dimensions: Case of Durum Wheat in Northern Tunisia

Author

Listed:
  • Zouhair Rached

    (National Institute of Agronomic Research of Tunisia (LER, INRAT), University of Carthage, Carthage 1054, Tunisia)

  • Ali Chebil

    (National Research Institute for Rural Engineering Water & Forestry (INRGREF), University of Carthage, Carthage 1054, Tunisia)

  • Chokri Thabet

    (Higher Agronomic Institute of Chott Meriem, University of Sousse, B.P. n° 47, Sousse 4042, Tunisia)

Abstract

The sustainability analysis of wheat farms is increasingly becoming interesting for the scientific community in order to help propose a production model ensuring food security and sustainability of agricultural production. This work aims to assess cereal farms’ sustainability in Northern Tunisia via analyzing the effect of farm size on sustainability dimensions. Toward this aim, the Farm Sustainability Indicators (IDEA) method and statistical tests (ANOVA, LSD) were used for the analysis of the obtained data from a representative sample consisting of 200 farms—located in the governorates of Beja, Jendouba and Bizerte—with different sizes (<5 ha; 5–20 ha and more than 20 ha). The IDEA method is built from three indicators of sustainability (environmental, social and economic) in agriculture. The results showed a very high variability in the sustainability scores of durum wheat farms. In fact, the scores relating to each sustainability dimension vary according to the farm size. Overall, the results highlight that small farms are the most economically vulnerable despite being friendly to the environment. However, large farms were relatively more viable, but less environmentally friendly.

Suggested Citation

  • Zouhair Rached & Ali Chebil & Chokri Thabet, 2022. "Effect of Farm Size on Sustainability Dimensions: Case of Durum Wheat in Northern Tunisia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(1), pages 1-13, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:15:y:2022:i:1:p:779-:d:1021910
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/779/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/15/1/779/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Patrik Mouron & Chiara Calabrese & Stève Breitenmoser & Simon Spycher & Robert Baur, 2016. "Sustainability Assessment of Plant Protection Strategies in Swiss Winter Wheat and Potato Production," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 6(1), pages 1-17, January.
    2. Tom Waas & Jean Hugé & Thomas Block & Tarah Wright & Francisco Benitez-Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability Assessment and Indicators: Tools in a Decision-Making Strategy for Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(9), pages 1-23, August.
    3. Christian Bux & Mariarosaria Lombardi & Erica Varese & Vera Amicarelli, 2022. "Economic and Environmental Assessment of Conventional versus Organic Durum Wheat Production in Southern Italy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-14, July.
    4. Tom Waas & Jean Huge & Thomas BLOCK & Tarah Wright & Francisco Javier Benitez Capistros & Aviel Verbruggen, 2014. "Sustainability assessment and indicators: Tools in a decision-making strategy for sustainable development," ULB Institutional Repository 2013/189410, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Catherine Le Roux & Marius Pretorius, 2016. "Conceptualizing the Limiting Issues Inhibiting Sustainability Embeddedness," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(4), pages 1-22, April.
    2. Justyna Patalas-Maliszewska & Hanna Łosyk, 2020. "An Approach to Assessing Sustainability in the Development of a Manufacturing Company," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-18, October.
    3. Sofia Dahlgren & Jonas Ammenberg, 2021. "Sustainability Assessment of Public Transport, Part II—Applying a Multi-Criteria Assessment Method to Compare Different Bus Technologies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(3), pages 1-30, January.
    4. María Luisa Pajuelo Moreno & Teresa Duarte-Atoche, 2019. "Relationship between Sustainable Disclosure and Performance—An Extension of Ullmann’s Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-33, August.
    5. Weiwei Li & Pingtao Yi & Danning Zhang, 2018. "Sustainability Evaluation of Cities in Northeastern China Using Dynamic TOPSIS-Entropy Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-15, December.
    6. Svatava Janoušková & Tomáš Hák & Bedřich Moldan, 2018. "Global SDGs Assessments: Helping or Confusing Indicators?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-14, May.
    7. Sungjo Hong & Ihl Kweon & Bum-Hyun Lee & Heechul Kim, 2019. "Indicators and Assessment System for Sustainability of Municipalities: A Case Study of South Korea’s Assessment of Sustainability of Cities (ASC)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(23), pages 1-21, November.
    8. Johan Du Plessis & Wouter Bam, 2018. "Comparing the Sustainable Development Potential of Industries: A Role for Sustainability Disclosures?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-30, March.
    9. Jean Hugé & Nibedita Mukherjee & Camille Fertel & Jean-Philippe Waaub & Thomas Block & Tom Waas & Nico Koedam & Farid Dahdouh-Guebas, 2015. "Conceptualizing the Effectiveness of Sustainability Assessment in Development Cooperation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(5), pages 1-17, May.
    10. Kajsa Borgnäs, 2017. "Indicators as ‘circular argumentation constructs’? An input–output analysis of the variable structure of five environmental sustainability country rankings," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 19(3), pages 769-790, June.
    11. Catherine Dezio & Davide Marino, 2018. "Towards an Impact Evaluation Framework to Measure Urban Resilience in Food Practices," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-13, June.
    12. Marcellinus Essah, 2022. "Gold mining in Ghana and the UN Sustainable Development Goals: Exploring community perspectives on social and environmental injustices," Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 30(1), pages 127-138, February.
    13. Karel Doubravský & Alena Kocmanová & Mirko Dohnal, 2018. "Analysis of Sustainability Decision Trees Generated by Qualitative Models Based on Equationless Heuristics," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-18, July.
    14. Iva Glibo & Laura Misener & Joerg Koenigstorfer, 2022. "Strategic Sustainable Development in International Sport Organisations: A Delphi Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-18, August.
    15. Karim Naderi Mahdei & Mehrdad Pouya & Fatemeh Taheri & Hossein Azadi & Steven Van Passel, 2015. "Sustainability Indicators of Iran’s Developmental Plans: Application of the Sustainability Compass Theory," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(11), pages 1-14, November.
    16. Vicent Penadés-Plà & José V. Martí & Tatiana García-Segura & Víctor Yepes, 2017. "Life-Cycle Assessment: A Comparison between Two Optimal Post-Tensioned Concrete Box-Girder Road Bridges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-21, October.
    17. Ye Sun & Tomohiro Akiyama, 2018. "An Empirical Study on Sustainable Agriculture Land Use Right Transfer in the Heihe River Basin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-13, February.
    18. Vicent Penadés-Plà & Tatiana García-Segura & José V. Martí & Víctor Yepes, 2018. "An Optimization-LCA of a Prestressed Concrete Precast Bridge," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-17, March.
    19. Anastasiia Moldavska, 2017. "Defining Organizational Context for Corporate Sustainability Assessment: Cross-Disciplinary Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(12), pages 1-25, December.
    20. Jha, Priyanka & Schmidt, Stefan, 2021. "State of biofuel development in sub-Saharan Africa: How far sustainable?," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 150(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:15:y:2022:i:1:p:779-:d:1021910. 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.