IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i4p1715-d1594139.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A New Integrated Framework to Assess the Impact of Social Farming on Sustainability and Rural Development: A Case Study in Lazio

Author

Listed:
  • Francesco Basset

    (CREA—Council for Agricultural Research and Analysis of Agricultural Economics, 00184 Rome, Italy)

  • Francesca Giarè

    (CREA—Council for Agricultural Research and Analysis of Agricultural Economics, 00184 Rome, Italy)

  • Saverio Senni

    (Department of Agricultural and Forestry Sciences, University of Tuscia, 01100 Viterbo, Italy)

  • Barbara Soriano

    (Research Centre for the Management of Agricultural and Environmental Risks (CEIGRAM), Department of Agricultural Economics, Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, 28040 Madrid, Spain)

Abstract

The importance of social farming (SF) is known in the literature, yet there is a lack of suitable tools for evaluating and monitoring these practices. Moreover, there is also a lack of data and information about the outcomes of the experiences and the impact they have on various stakeholders. Consequently, it is difficult to understand the extent to which SF can contribute to the achievement of sustainability and rural development goals. This study proposes an integrated framework to evaluate social farming practices, combining different methodologies such as SWOT analysis, Business Model Canvas (BMC), Social Return on Investment (SROI), and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). The research evaluated a regional initiative in Lazio Region (Italy), aimed at the socio-occupational integration of disadvantaged individuals through SF networks. Data collection involved 127 stakeholders through interviews and focus groups. Through the integration of SWOT analysis and BMC, the strong influence of the local contexts and project leaders on the impacts of SF is shown. In addition, the integration of AHP with SROI highlights how to address the limitations in quantifying social, economic, and environmental benefits, thus improving the accuracy of impact assessments. Finally, the results underline the need for policies that ensure the continuity and scalability of SF projects, highlighting the central role of the farm in sustainable socio-occupational inclusion. The study contributes to the advancement of SF evaluation methodologies and informs future policy development.

Suggested Citation

  • Francesco Basset & Francesca Giarè & Saverio Senni & Barbara Soriano, 2025. "A New Integrated Framework to Assess the Impact of Social Farming on Sustainability and Rural Development: A Case Study in Lazio," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(4), pages 1-20, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1715-:d:1594139
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1715/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/4/1715/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Francesco Basset, 2023. "The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Antoni F. Tulla & Ana Vera & Carles Guirado & Natàlia Valldeperas, 2020. "The Return on Investment in Social Farming: A Strategy for Sustainable Rural Development in Rural Catalonia," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-28, June.
    3. Bond, Richard & Curran, Johanna & Kirkpatrick, Colin & Lee, Norman & Francis, Paul, 2001. "Integrated Impact Assessment for Sustainable Development: A Case Study Approach," World Development, Elsevier, vol. 29(6), pages 1011-1024, June.
    4. Antoni F. Tulla & Ana Vera, 2019. "Could Social Farming Be a Strategy to Support Food Sovereignty in Europe?," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(5), pages 1-24, April.
    5. Marina García-Llorente & Cristiano M. Rossignoli & Francesco Di Iacovo & Roberta Moruzzo, 2016. "Social Farming in the Promotion of Social-Ecological Sustainability in Rural and Periurban Areas," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(12), pages 1-15, November.
    6. Saaty, Thomas L. & Vargas, Luis G., 1987. "Uncertainty and rank order in the analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 107-117, October.
    7. Francesca Giarè & Gabriella Ricciardi & Patrizia Borsotto, 2020. "Migrants Workers and Processes of Social Inclusion in Italy: The Possibilities Offered by Social Farming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-20, May.
    8. Marta Borgi & Mario Marcolin & Paolo Tomasin & Cinzia Correale & Aldina Venerosi & Alberto Grizzo & Roberto Orlich & Francesca Cirulli, 2019. "Nature-Based Interventions for Mental Health Care: Social Network Analysis as a Tool to Map Social Farms and their Response to Social Inclusion and Community Engagement," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(18), pages 1-14, September.
    9. Francesco Di Iacovo, 2020. "Social Farming Evolutionary Web: from Public Intervention to Value Co-Production," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-28, June.
    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. Francesco Basset, 2023. "The Evaluation of Social Farming through Social Return on Investment: A Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(4), pages 1-14, February.
    2. Agata Nicolosi & Valentina Rosa Laganà & Donatella Di Gregorio & Donatella Privitera, 2021. "Social Farming in the Virtuous System of the Circular Economy. An Exploratory Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(2), pages 1-24, January.
    3. Roberta Moruzzo & Giulia Granai & Caterina De Benedictis & Morgana Galardi & Vincenzina Colosimo & Jacopo Sforzi & Francesco Di Iacovo, 2022. "The Development of Sustainable Social Farming in Italy: A Case Studies Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-17, November.
    4. Mohammed A. Al-Ghamdi & Khalid S. Al-Gahtani, 2022. "Integrated Value Engineering and Life Cycle Cost Modeling for HVAC System Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(4), pages 1-30, February.
    5. Annapia Ferrara & Concetta Ferrara & Sabrina Tomasi & Gigliola Paviotti & Giovanna Bertella & Alessio Cavicchi, 2023. "Exploring the Potential of Social Farmers’ Networking as a Leverage for Inclusive Tourism," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(7), pages 1-22, March.
    6. Antonio J. Castro & Cristina Quintas-Soriano & Jodi Brandt & Carla L. Atkinson & Colden V. Baxter & Morey Burnham & Benis N. Egoh & Marina García-Llorente & Jason P. Julian & Berta Martín-López & Feli, 2018. "Applying Place-Based Social-Ecological Research to Address Water Scarcity: Insights for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-13, May.
    7. Maciej Nowak, 2010. "Interactive Multicriteria Decision Aiding Under Risk—Methods and Applications," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91, October.
    8. Mikhailov, L., 2004. "A fuzzy approach to deriving priorities from interval pairwise comparison judgements," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 159(3), pages 687-704, December.
    9. Wang, Ying-Ming & Elhag, Taha M.S., 2007. "A goal programming method for obtaining interval weights from an interval comparison matrix," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(1), pages 458-471, February.
    10. Ji-Hee Lee & Woo-Young Chun & Jun-Ho Choi, 2021. "Weighting the Attributes of Human-Related Activities for Fire Safety Measures in Historic Villages," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(6), pages 1-12, March.
    11. Zeshui Xu, 2013. "Compatibility Analysis of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Preference Relations in Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(3), pages 463-482, May.
    12. Lee, Norman, 2004. "Bridging the Gap Between Theory and Practice in Integrated Assessment," Impact Assessment Research Centre (IARC) Working Papers 30575, University of Manchester, Institute for Development Policy and Management (IDPM).
    13. Levary, Reuven R. & Wan, Ke, 1999. "An analytic hierarchy process based simulation model for entry mode decision regarding foreign direct investment," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 27(6), pages 661-677, December.
    14. Stefanos Dosis & George P. Petropoulos & Kleomenis Kalogeropoulos, 2023. "A Geospatial Approach to Identify and Evaluate Ecological Restoration Sites in Post-Fire Landscapes," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(12), pages 1-23, December.
    15. Zaras, Kazimierz, 2001. "Rough approximation of a preference relation by a multi-attribute stochastic dominance for determinist and stochastic evaluation problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 130(2), pages 305-314, April.
    16. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui, 2014. "Stochastic preference analysis in numerical preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 237(2), pages 628-633.
    17. Zhu, Bin & Xu, Zeshui & Zhang, Ren & Hong, Mei, 2016. "Hesitant analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(2), pages 602-614.
    18. Jodlbauer, Herbert & Tripathi, Shailesh & Brunner, Manuel & Bachmann, Nadine, 2022. "Stability of cross impact matrices," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    19. Lucas, Rochelle Irene & Promentilla, Michael Angelo & Ubando, Aristotle & Tan, Raymond Girard & Aviso, Kathleen & Yu, Krista Danielle, 2017. "An AHP-based evaluation method for teacher training workshop on information and communication technology," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 63(C), pages 93-100.
    20. Yulan Wang & Huayou Chen & Ligang Zhou, 2013. "Logarithm Compatibility of Interval Multiplicative Preference Relations with an Application to Determining the Optimal Weights of Experts in the Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 22(4), pages 759-772, July.

    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:17:y:2025:i:4:p:1715-:d:1594139. 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.