MASC 2.0, un outil d'évaluation multicritère pour estimer la contribution des systèmes de culture au développement durable

International audienceCurrent changes in the field of agriculture encourage stakeholders to envision new and moresustainable production methods. For this purpose, tools are needed to assess the proposed or newlydesigned solutions before they are taken to the fields and disseminated. MASC 2.0 is a multi-criteriaassessment tool designed to assess the performance of cropping systems in terms of theirsustainability. It was based on a decision support system (DEXi) which aggregates 39 qualitative criteriain a single tree. This tool applies to a wide range of situations. It can therefore be used to identify thebest cropping systems in a given territory (ex post assessment) or design prototypes of croppingsystems (ex ante assessment). Thanks to its flexibility, MASC 2.0 offers users the opportunity topropose their own vision of sustainable development by changing the weight given to each evaluationcriterion. Its friendly and simple interface makes this tool a privileged support for exchanges andmediation between researchers, extension workers, farmers, and public authorities. Its main drawbacksare the time spent to fill in all the criteria and the inherent limitations related to the given scale (croppingsystem) in relation to the larger scales more often used to handle sustainable development issues.Les changements actuels du contexte agricole encouragent les différents acteurs à réfléchir à de nouveaux modes de production plus durables. Pour y parvenir, des outils sont nécessaires pour évaluer les solutions identifiées ou nouvellement conçues avant leur expérimentation et leur diffusion. MASC 2.0 est un outil d'évaluation multicritère des performances des systèmes de cultures assolées du point de vue de leur contribution au développement durable. Il a été développé sur un logiciel d'aide à la décision DEXi qui agrège dans une arborescence les 39 critères qualitatifs retenus pour l'évaluation. MASC 2.0 peut être utilisé pour repérer les systèmes actuels les plus performants dans un contexte donné (évaluation a posteriori). Il permet aussi de classer des systèmes de culture conçus par prototypage (évaluation a priori). Par sa flexibilité, MASC 2.0 offre la possibilité aux utilisateurs de décliner leur propre vision du développement durable en modifiant le poids accordé à chaque critère d'évaluation. L'interface du modèle, conviviale et simple d'utilisation, en fait un support d'échanges et de médiation privilégié entre chercheurs, conseillers agricoles, agriculteurs et pouvoirs publics. Ses principaux inconvénients résident dans le temps nécessaire pour renseigner tous les critères et dans les limites intrinsèques liées à l'échelle considérée pour traiter des questions de développement durable, souvent abordées à des échelles plus larges

DEXiPM, a tool for supporting the design of innovative IPM strategies

absen

L'évaluation multicritère des systèmes agricoles : une révolution des méthodes

L'évaluation multicritère des systèmes agricoles : une révolution des méthode

Ex ante assessment of the sustainability of alternative cropping systems: implications for using multi-criteria decision-aid methods. A review

Sustainability is a holistic and complex multi-dimensional concept encompassing economic, social and environmental issues, and its assessment is a key step in the implementation of sustainable agricultural systems. Realistic assessments of sustainability require: (1) the integration of diverse information concerning economic, social and environmental objectives; and (2) the handling of conflicting aspects of these objectives as a function of the views and opinions of the individuals involved in the assessment process. The assessment of sustainability is therefore increasingly regarded as a typical decision-making problem that could be handled by multi-criteria decision-aid (MCDA) methods. However, the number and variability of MCDA methods are continually increasing, and these methods are not all equally relevant for sustainability assessment. The demands for such approaches are also rapidly changing, and faster ex ante assessment approaches are required, to address scales currently insufficiently dealt with, such as cropping system level. Researchers regularly carry out comparative analyses of MCDA methods and propose guidelines for the selection of a priori relevant methods for the assessment problem considered. However, many of the selection criteria used are based on technical/operational assumptions that have little to do with the specificities of ex ante sustainability assessment of alternative cropping systems. We attempt here to provide a reasoned comparative review of the main groups of MCDA methods, based on considerations related to those specificities. The following main guidelines emerge from our discussion of these methods: (1) decision rule-based and outranking qualitative MCDA methods should be preferred; (2) different MCDA tools should be used simultaneously, making it possible to evaluate and compare the results obtained; and (3) a relevantly structured group of decision-makers should be established for the selection of tool variants of the choosen MCDA methods, the design/choice of sustainability criteria, and the analysis and interpretation of the evaluation results

MASC, a qualitative multi-attribute decision model for ex ante assessment of the sustainability of cropping systems

Realistic assessments of sustainability are often viewed as typical decision-making problems requiring multi-criteria decision-aid (MCDA) methods taking into account the conflicting objectives underlying the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainability, and the different sources of knowledge representing them. Some MCDA-based studies have resulted in the development of sustainable agricultural systems, but the new challenges facing agriculture and the increasing unpredictability of their driving forces highlight the need for faster ex ante (‘Before-the-event’) assessment frameworks. These frameworks should also (i) provide a more realistic assessment of sustainability, by integrating a wider range of informal knowledge, via the use of qualitative information; (ii) address alternative scales, such as cropping system level, improving granularity for the handling of sustainability issues and (iii) target a larger panel of decision-makers and contexts. We describe here the MASC model, which is at the center of a framework addressing these objectives. The MASC model has at its core a decision tree that breaks the sustainability assessment decisional problem down into simpler units as a function of sustainability dimensional structure(economic, social and environmental), generating a vector of 32 holistic ‘mixed’ (quantitative and qualitative) elementary criteria rating cropping systems. The assessment process involves the calculation of these criteria, their homogenization into qualitative information for input into the model and their aggregation throughout the decision tree based on ‘If-Then’ decision rules, entered by the user. We present the model and describe its first implementation for the evaluation of four cropping systems generated from expert knowledge, and discuss its relevance to the objectives cited above. The MASC model has several advantages over existing methods, due to its ability to handle qualitative information, its transparency, flexibility and feasibility

Assessing innovative cropping systems with DEXiPM, a qualitative multi-criteria assessment tool derived from DEXi

Modern intensive agriculture has to face the challenge of feeding the world’s growing population while reducing its environmental impacts. Assessing in an ex ante way the sustainability of innovative cropping systems will increase the efficiency of the innovation process. To this aim, DEXiPM (DEXi Pest Management) has been developed for ex ante assessment of the sustainability of arable cropping systems, particularly integrated crop management systems with a limited use of pesticides. It has 75 basic indicators describing the cropping system and the context of the assessment, and 86 aggregated indicators, assessing the usual three dimensions of sustainability in terms of social, environmental and economic issues. DEXiPM was implemented to assess and compare current and innovative winter crop- and maizebased cropping systems for a French region. The evaluation results showed that innovative cropping systems with a limited use of pesticides can have a better overall sustainability, despite the fact that some of the indicators can be negatively impacted. DEXiPM is a relevant tool to evaluate the sustainability of actual cropping systems, to diagnose their strong and weak points and, on this basis, to encourage discussions during the design of innovative cropping systems that will afterwards be tested in fields. The design of DEXiPM is also based on a state of the art on agricultural sustainability which led to point out gaps in knowledge that need to be filled (e.g. the impact of crop management on biodiversity). From the discussions of the design phase and the implementation test, improvements have been highlighted. The version presented here includes them as well as the results of the first feedbacks from users and from an evaluation phase. The coherency of cropping system assessments has been judged by experts and found consistent, constituting the first step of the model evaluation. Sensitivity analysis and comparison with quantitative methods are currently on-going to evaluate the accuracy of the model to rank cropping systems

Guidelines to design models assessing agricultural sustainability, based upon feedbacks from the DEXi decision support system

Abstract New agricultural systems are required to satisfy societal expectations such as higher quantity and quality of agricultural products, reducing environmental impacts, and more jobs. However, identifying and implementing more suitable agricultural systems is difficult due to conflicting objectives and to the wide diversity of scientific disciplines required to solve agricultural issues. Therefore, designing models to assess the sustainability of agricultural systems requires multicriteria decision aid methods. The French agronomist community has recently developed 11 hierarchical and qualitative models to assess sustainability using the DEXi decision aid software. Here, we give guidelines to help designers to build their own specific models. First, we present the principles andapplications of the DEXi software. Then, we provide guidance on the following steps of model designing: (1) initial analysis and planning of the design process, (2) selection and hierarchy of sustainability criteria, (3) indicator selection and building, (4) parameterization, (5) evaluation, and (6) model dissemination and uses. We then discuss advantages and drawbacks of this kind of modeling formalism, the role of a participatory approach, and the main properties to consider during the design process