Search

The European Union (EU) is among the largest beef producers in the world. Besides the economic turnover, beef production causes adverse environmental impacts such as climate change. The sector is known for high heterogeneity in production systems, partly explained by different natural and economic conditions. This study assesses the environmental, social, and economic performances of three typical beef production systems in the EU at the farm level. The farm optimization model FarmDyn is used in this study to carry out a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) from cradle to farm gate; combined with a sensitivity analysis on prices, yields and animal traits. The assessed systems are a Belgian suckler cow farm that fattens its own offspring (BE); a system where calves raised in a French suckler cow farm are fattened on a farm in Italy (FR-IT); and a system where dairy bred calves from one farm are fattened on another farm, both located in Germany (GE-GE). The functional unit is 1 kg of carcass weight from young bulls. In addition to several environmental impact categories, the gross margin is estimated as an economic indicator. The social performance is measured with on-farm workload differentiated by tasks, and human calorie and protein conversion used for production. GE-GE performs better than the other systems in the environmental indicators because emissions are partially allocated towards dairy production. FR-IT shows the highest gross margin due to a higher beef price. BE and FR-IT use less human-consumable feed, as both systems employ grasslands and by-products for animal feeding. The sensitivity analysis identifies the price of beef and calves, the yield of roughage crops, and the weight and age of animals as major factors influencing the results. FarmDyn proves useful to perform LCSA of beef production on a farm-level as it integrates environmental, economic, and social indicators in a consistent framework; while considering price effects and farmers' be

The European Union (EU) is among the largest beef producers in the world. Besides the economic turnover, beef production causes adverse environmental impacts such as climate change. The sector is known for high heterogeneity in production systems, partly explained by different natural and economic conditions. This study assesses the environmental, social, and economic performances of three typical beef production systems in the EU at the farm level. The farm optimization model FarmDyn is used in this study to carry out a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) from cradle to farm gate; combined with a sensitivity analysis on prices, yields and animal traits. The assessed systems are a Belgian suckler cow farm that fattens its own offspring (BE); a system where calves raised in a French suckler cow farm are fattened on a farm in Italy (FR-IT); and a system where dairy bred calves from one farm are fattened on another farm, both located in Germany (GE-GE). The functional unit is 1 kg of carcass weight from young bulls. In addition to several environmental impact categories, the gross margin is estimated as an economic indicator. The social performance is measured with on-farm workload differentiated by tasks, and human calorie and protein conversion used for production. GE-GE performs better than the other systems in the environmental indicators because emissions are partially allocated towards dairy production. FR-IT shows the highest gross margin due to a higher beef price. BE and FR-IT use less human-consumable feed, as both systems employ grasslands and by-products for animal feeding. The sensitivity analysis identifies the price of beef and calves, the yield of roughage crops, and the weight and age of animals as major factors influencing the results. FarmDyn proves useful to perform LCSA of beef production on a farm-level as it integrates environmental, economic, and social indicators in a consistent framework; while considering price effects and farmers' be

The European Union (EU) is among the largest beef producers in the world. Besides the economic turnover, beef production causes adverse environmental impacts such as climate change. The sector is known for high heterogeneity in production systems, partly explained by different natural and economic conditions. This study assesses the environmental, social, and economic performances of three typical beef production systems in the EU at the farm level. The farm optimization model FarmDyn is used in this study to carry out a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) from cradle to farm gate; combined with a sensitivity analysis on prices, yields and animal traits. The assessed systems are a Belgian suckler cow farm that fattens its own offspring (BE); a system where calves raised in a French suckler cow farm are fattened on a farm in Italy (FR-IT); and a system where dairy bred calves from one farm are fattened on another farm, both located in Germany (GE-GE). The functional unit is 1 kg of carcass weight from young bulls. In addition to several environmental impact categories, the gross margin is estimated as an economic indicator. The social performance is measured with on-farm workload differentiated by tasks, and human calorie and protein conversion used for production. GE-GE performs better than the other systems in the environmental indicators because emissions are partially allocated towards dairy production. FR-IT shows the highest gross margin due to a higher beef price. BE and FR-IT use less human-consumable feed, as both systems employ grasslands and by-products for animal feeding. The sensitivity analysis identifies the price of beef and calves, the yield of roughage crops, and the weight and age of animals as major factors influencing the results. FarmDyn proves useful to perform LCSA of beef production on a farm-level as it integrates environmental, economic, and social indicators in a consistent framework; while considering price effects and farmers' be

The European Union (EU) is among the largest beef producers in the world. Besides the economic turnover, beef production causes adverse environmental impacts such as climate change. The sector is known for high heterogeneity in production systems, partly explained by different natural and economic conditions. This study assesses the environmental, social, and economic performances of three typical beef production systems in the EU at the farm level. The farm optimization model FarmDyn is used in this study to carry out a Life Cycle Sustainability Assessment (LCSA) from cradle to farm gate; combined with a sensitivity analysis on prices, yields and animal traits. The assessed systems are a Belgian suckler cow farm that fattens its own offspring (BE); a system where calves raised in a French suckler cow farm are fattened on a farm in Italy (FR-IT); and a system where dairy bred calves from one farm are fattened on another farm, both located in Germany (GE-GE). The functional unit is 1 kg of carcass weight from young bulls. In addition to several environmental impact categories, the gross margin is estimated as an economic indicator. The social performance is measured with on-farm workload differentiated by tasks, and human calorie and protein conversion used for production. GE-GE performs better than the other systems in the environmental indicators because emissions are partially allocated towards dairy production. FR-IT shows the highest gross margin due to a higher beef price. BE and FR-IT use less human-consumable feed, as both systems employ grasslands and by-products for animal feeding. The sensitivity analysis identifies the price of beef and calves, the yield of roughage crops, and the weight and age of animals as major factors influencing the results. FarmDyn proves useful to perform LCSA of beef production on a farm-level as it integrates environmental, economic, and social indicators in a consistent framework; while considering price effects and farmers' be

A l’échelle d’un petit territoire, plusieurs dynamiques interviennent et ont, à terme, des conséquences sur le paysage et l'économie locale. Ces dynamiques sont de nature différente : évolution de la démographie et des structures agricoles, changement d'environnement socio-économique et de politiques (PAC, prix des produits agricoles, de l’énergie et des intrants). Pour les responsables locaux, il est difficile d'anticiper la dynamique agricole globale du territoire, et de diagnostiquer les priorités d'intervention. En partenariat avec la commission agricole d'une communauté de communes de montagne, nous avons mis en place une démarche prospective originale articulant les niveaux de l'exploitation et du territoire, et mobilisant l'expertise d'acteurs locaux et la modélisation technico-économique des exploitations. Cette démarche, réalisée sur 10 communes du plateau herbager du Mézenc en Haute-Loire, a permis d'appréhender l'importance des effets marquants des divers changements pour le territoire d'ici 5 ans. Il en ressort que d'ici 2015, les réformes de la PAC et les fluctuations de prix devraient avoir plus d’impact sur l’économie agricole du territoire que sur la gestion de sa surface et donc son paysage. Globalement, tout en tenant compte de la diversité des structures en place, le revenu agricole des exploitations de la zone perdrait 3% alors que le revenu par travailleur devrait gagner 14% avec une importance accrue des aides publiques. Par contre, la valeur ajoutée produite chuterait de 30%, ce qui indique bien la priorité de ce type de zone pour conserver son économie : viser des productions agricoles démarquées et à base de ressources locales (label, AOP, marques, Agriculture Biologique).

A l’échelle d’un petit territoire, plusieurs dynamiques interviennent et ont, à terme, des conséquences sur le paysage et l'économie locale. Ces dynamiques sont de nature différente : évolution de la démographie et des structures agricoles, changement d'environnement socio-économique et de politiques (PAC, prix des produits agricoles, de l’énergie et des intrants). Pour les responsables locaux, il est difficile d'anticiper la dynamique agricole globale du territoire, et de diagnostiquer les priorités d'intervention. En partenariat avec la commission agricole d'une communauté de communes de montagne, nous avons mis en place une démarche prospective originale articulant les niveaux de l'exploitation et du territoire, et mobilisant l'expertise d'acteurs locaux et la modélisation technico-économique des exploitations. Cette démarche, réalisée sur 10 communes du plateau herbager du Mézenc en Haute-Loire, a permis d'appréhender l'importance des effets marquants des divers changements pour le territoire d'ici 5 ans. Il en ressort que d'ici 2015, les réformes de la PAC et les fluctuations de prix devraient avoir plus d’impact sur l’économie agricole du territoire que sur la gestion de sa surface et donc son paysage. Globalement, tout en tenant compte de la diversité des structures en place, le revenu agricole des exploitations de la zone perdrait 3% alors que le revenu par travailleur devrait gagner 14% avec une importance accrue des aides publiques. Par contre, la valeur ajoutée produite chuterait de 30%, ce qui indique bien la priorité de ce type de zone pour conserver son économie : viser des productions agricoles démarquées et à base de ressources locales (label, AOP, marques, Agriculture Biologique).

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

in the Massif Central. An organic suckler cattle farm network was set up in order to establish technical and economic references. In 2004, 22 farms were monitored (13 of which had been monitored since 2001). All of these farms are located in economically-depressed areas. One hundred percent of the fodder area is under grassland. Annual crops (cereals and a cereal/pulse mix) take up 13% of the farm area and are used as livestock feed. The stocking rate (1 Livestock Unit/ha of fodder area) is 20% lower on organic farms than on conventional farms. Organic farms use 33% less concentrates per LU, and the meat production/LU is 16% lower than for conventional farms. The poorly structured organic beef market forces organic farmers to sell most of their animals (mainly store animals, since fattened animals represent only 43% of the animals sold) on the conventional market without getting premium prices. Since only fattened animals are sold on the organic market at a premium price, the average selling price (€/kg live-weight) of all the animals sold is only 12% higher for organically-bred than for conventionally-bred animals. However, because of lower operational costs (-35% for herd and fodder area costs), the bovine gross margin/LU is 3% higher for OF than for conventionally-bred animals. The lower stocking rate leads to a lower gross product per hectare of farm area. Since this result is balanced by a very low level of operational costs (no chemical inputs), the economic efficiency of the OF system is higher than that of the conventional system. The farm income per worker is the same in both systems. The search for feed self-sufficiency at the farm scale is a crucial element in farm economics, but it is only possible on mixed-crop livestock farms where cropping is possible with adapted crop rotation. The grassland farms, which are the least self-sufficient and have to purchase all the concentrates needed, must sell all their animals on the organic market to get the premium

Dexi-SH* is an ex ante multivariate model for assessing the sustainability of dairy cows grazing systems. This model is composed of three sub-models that evaluate the impact of the systems on: (i) biotic resources; (ii) abiotic resources, and (iii) pollution risks. The structuring of the hierarchical tree was inspired by that of the Masc model. The choice of criteria and their aggregation modalities were discussed within a multi-disciplinary group of scientists. For each cluster, a utility function was established in order to determine weighting and priority functions between criteria. The model can take local and regional conditions and standards into account by adjusting criterion categories to the agroecological context, and the specific views of the decision makers by changing the weighting of criteria.