IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/soinre/v157y2021i1d10.1007_s11205-019-02209-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stakeholders’ Opinions: Food Sustainability as an Exemplary Case

Author

Listed:
  • Lars Carlsen

    (Awareness Center)

  • Rainer Bruggemann

    (Leibniz-Institute of Freshwater Ecology and Inland Fisheries)

Abstract

Stakeholders decisions often are based on the construction of an indicative quantity (a composite indicator), which can be obtained by an aggregation process of a series of single indicators. This aggregation process combines single indicators to one quantity, the composite indicator. In the most simple aggregation technique a weighted sum is applied. Unfortunately, stakeholders often have different opinions concerning the individual weights that should be associated with single indicators. The resulting composite indicator applied for an eventual ranking may consequently be different from stakeholder to stakeholder. The present study focuses on a partial order based methodology for evaluating stakeholders’ opinions based on the food sustainability index for 2017 as an exemplary case. The paper presents the methodological background for the use of composite indicators under different weighting schemes. The food sustainability index (FSI) is composed through an aggregation of three main indicators, i.e., food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture and nutritional challenges. In the present case four fictitious ‘stakeholders’, represented by four different weighting schemes, expert-based, political, outcome-based and uniform are included. The study shows that differences between the four weighting schemes are present. Furthermore it is shown that within certain limits the overall ranking of 34 countries based on the FSI leads to a linear ranking of 4 specific groups of countries, virtually summarizing the different stakeholders’ opinions.

Suggested Citation

  • Lars Carlsen & Rainer Bruggemann, 2021. "Stakeholders’ Opinions: Food Sustainability as an Exemplary Case," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 157(1), pages 43-56, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:soinre:v:157:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-019-02209-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11205-019-02209-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11205-019-02209-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11205-019-02209-6?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. Marco Fattore & Rosanna Grassi, 2014. "Measuring dynamics and structural change of time-dependent socio-economic networks," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 48(4), pages 1821-1834, July.
    2. Giuseppe Munda, 2008. "Social Multi-Criteria Evaluation for a Sustainable Economy," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-3-540-73703-2, July.
    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. Jose Antonio Fernández Gallardo & Jose María Caridad y Ocerín & María Genoveva Millán Vázquez de la Torre, 2019. "Evaluation of the Reception Capacity of a Certain Area Regarding Tourist Housing, Addressing Sustainable-Tourism Criteria," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-19, November.
    2. Francis Marleau Donais & Irène Abi-Zeid & E. Owen D. Waygood & Roxane Lavoie, 2021. "A Framework for Post-Project Evaluation of Multicriteria Decision Aiding Processes from the Stakeholders’ Perspective: Design and Application," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 30(5), pages 1161-1191, October.
    3. Catarina Roseta‐Palma & Yiğit Sağlam, 2019. "Downside risk in reservoir management," Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society, vol. 63(2), pages 328-353, April.
    4. Zepharovich, Elena & Ceddia, M. Graziano & Rist, Stephan, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation of land-use scenarios in the Chaco Salteño: Complementing the three-pillar sustainability approach with environmental justice," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    5. Gorsevski, Pece V. & Cathcart, Steven C. & Mirzaei, Golrokh & Jamali, Mohsin M. & Ye, Xinyue & Gomezdelcampo, Enrique, 2013. "A group-based spatial decision support system for wind farm site selection in Northwest Ohio," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 55(C), pages 374-385.
    6. Vincent Van Roy & Daniel Nepelski, 2018. "Validation of the Innovation Radar assessment framework," JRC Research Reports JRC110926, Joint Research Centre.
    7. Saisana, Michaela & d'Hombres, Béatrice & Saltelli, Andrea, 2011. "Rickety numbers: Volatility of university rankings and policy implications," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 40(1), pages 165-177, February.
    8. Andonegi, Aitor & Garmendia, Eneko & Aldezabal, Arantza, 2021. "Social multi-criteria evaluation for managing biodiversity conservation conflicts," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C).
    9. Walther Zeug & Alberto Bezama & Urs Moesenfechtel & Anne Jähkel & Daniela Thrän, 2019. "Stakeholders’ Interests and Perceptions of Bioeconomy Monitoring Using a Sustainable Development Goal Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(6), pages 1-24, March.
    10. Carayannis, Elias G. & Grigoroudis, Evangelos & Wurth, Bernd, 2022. "OR for entrepreneurial ecosystems: A problem-oriented review and agenda," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 300(3), pages 791-808.
    11. Temper, Leah & Martinez-Alier, Joan, 2013. "The god of the mountain and Godavarman: Net Present Value, indigenous territorial rights and sacredness in a bauxite mining conflict in India," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 79-87.
    12. Maria Cerreta & Pasquale De Toro, 2012. "Strategic Environmental Assessment of Port Plans in Italy: Experiences, Approaches, Tools," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 4(11), pages 1-34, November.
    13. Ruiz, Francisco & El Gibari, Samira & Cabello, José M. & Gómez, Trinidad, 2020. "MRP-WSCI: Multiple reference point based weak and strong composite indicators," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 95(C).
    14. Paula Trivino-Tarradas & Manuel R. Gomez-Ariza & Gottlieb Basch & Emilio J. Gonzalez-Sanchez, 2019. "Sustainability Assessment of Annual and Permanent Crops: The Inspia Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(3), pages 1-21, January.
    15. Aubert, Alice H. & Esculier, Fabien & Lienert, Judit, 2020. "Recommendations for online elicitation of swing weights from citizens in environmental decision-making," Operations Research Perspectives, Elsevier, vol. 7(C).
    16. Giuseppe Munda, 2015. "Beyond Gdp: An Overview Of Measurement Issues In Redefining ‘Wealth’," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 29(3), pages 403-422, July.
    17. Lars Carlsen, 2017. "An Alternative View on Distribution Keys for the Possible Relocation of Refugees in the European Union," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 130(3), pages 1147-1163, February.
    18. George da Mota Passos Neto & Luciana Hazin Alencar & Rodolfo Valdes-Vasquez, 2023. "Multiple-Criteria Methods for Assessing Social Sustainability in the Built Environment: A Systematic Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-24, November.
    19. Etxano, Iker & Villalba-Eguiluz, Unai, 2021. "Twenty-five years of social multi-criteria evaluation (SMCE) in the search for sustainability: Analysis of case studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 188(C).
    20. Pelenc, Jérôme & Etxano, Iker, 2021. "Capabilities, Ecosystem Services, and Strong Sustainability through SMCE: The Case of Haren (Belgium)," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(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:spr:soinre:v:157:y:2021:i:1:d:10.1007_s11205-019-02209-6. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.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.