The Objectives and Priorities for the Azorean Dairy Farmers’ Decisions - The Agricultural Economics of the 21st Century - page 140

there are several factors that affect the use of methodologies in same problems that
are intended to solve.
Moreover, the use of various multi-criteria methods are often not done in an
isolated or individual way, but integrated or in a combined form, complementing
the procedures performed, as evidenced by the work of Zekri and Romero ( 1991 ),
Poeta ( 1994 ), Lakshminarayan et al. ( 1995 ), Van Huylenbroeck ( 1997 ), Mimouni
et al. ( 2000 ), Raju et al. ( 2001 ), El-Gayar and Leung ( 2001 ), Carvalho ( 2006 ),
Akkal-Corfini et al. ( 2007 ), Latinopoulos ( 2007 ), Marta-Costa ( 2008 , 2010 ), and
Marta-Costa et al. ( 2013 ) where objectives of multiple nature, which included
criteria for economic, social, and/or environmental, have been equated.
Other times, the obtained results from the Multi-Criteria decision models allow
the development of methodologies for planning, simulation, or evaluation as seen in
the works of Prathapar et al. ( 1997 ), Nibbering and Van Rheenen ( 1998 ), Zander
and K¨chele ( 1999 ), Diaz-Balteiro and Romero ( 2004a ), Meyer-Aurich ( 2005 ), and
Groot et al. ( 2007 ). In the first a multi-criteria hierarchical structure (Salt Water
And Groundwater MANagement—SWAGMAN) to identify a profitable use for the
land not destined for rice cultivation was developed. Nibbering and Van Rheenen
( 1998 ) presented a tool for the analysis of agricultural systems (Quantified Farming
Systems Analysis—QFSA), based on the optimal allocation of resources at the farm
level (Farm Level Optimal Resource Allocation—FLORA). Zander and K¨chele
( 1999 ) developed a model based on hierarchically interrelated modules, called
Multi-Objective Decision Support Tool for Agroecosystem Management—
MODAM, later used by Meyer-Aurich ( 2005 ). IMAGES (Interactive Multi-goal
Agricultural Landscape Generation and Evaluation System) is the designation of
the methodology for land optimization use proposed by Groot et al. ( 2007 ), where
agronomic, economic, and environmental indicators with indicators of biodiversity
and landscape quality are combined. And, through the techniques of Multi-Criteria
decision, Diaz-Balteiro and Romero ( 2004a ) have proposed a “Sustainability
Index” to assess the sustainability of natural systems, according to a set of indica-
tors, based on the minimization of the distance to the ideal point. Its objectives
consisted of a compromise between solutions that promote maximum aggregate
sustainability (engineering solution) and the most balanced solutions (green
solution).
In the concrete case of the Azores study in regard to the farmers' priorities, the
two main approaches showed in Fig. 10.1 can be used in building decision making
models. The major difficulty associated with the formulation of MAUT models lies
in the high degree of interaction with the decision maker required by this metho-
dology. This is important in agriculture, where cultural background is often the
most suitable form undertaken in such interactive process, but it is difficult to apply
to agriculture decisions, because there is some interaction difficulty between the
analyst and the farmer (low level of education) (Amador et al. 1998 ). However,
Multiobjective criteria lack the theoretical soundness of MAUT, but it can accom-
modate in a realistic manner the multiplicity of criteria inherent to most agricultural
planning problems (Romero and Rehman 1989 ).