Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards

Over the last decade, there have been increasing calls for robust impact evaluations of voluntary agricultural sustainability standards (VSS’s). In response, this study reviews the literature regarding 13 major agricultural standards, asking: where are certified crops being studied? Which sustainabi...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal:	Rebecca Traldi
Formato:	article
Lenguaje:	EN
Publicado:	Elsevier 2021
Materias:	Voluntary sustainability standards Agriculture Impact evaluation Evidence synthesis Ecology QH540-549.5
Acceso en línea:	https://doaj.org/article/1d11062ad6364e43bfd1d942e8de440c
Etiquetas:	Agregar Etiqueta Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!

id	oai:doaj.org-article:1d11062ad6364e43bfd1d942e8de440c
record_format	dspace
spelling	oai:doaj.org-article:1d11062ad6364e43bfd1d942e8de440c2021-12-01T04:47:17ZProgress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards1470-160X10.1016/j.ecolind.2021.107490https://doaj.org/article/1d11062ad6364e43bfd1d942e8de440c2021-06-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1470160X21001552https://doaj.org/toc/1470-160XOver the last decade, there have been increasing calls for robust impact evaluations of voluntary agricultural sustainability standards (VSS’s). In response, this study reviews the literature regarding 13 major agricultural standards, asking: where are certified crops being studied? Which sustainability outcomes and indicators are measured? And finally, what does the current evidence base suggest about VSS outcomes? The analysis of 45 peer-reviewed articles suggests a mismatch between what is certified and what is studied. Some crops and standards are over-represented in the literature as compared to their amount of certified production (e.g. coffee and Fairtrade certification), while others are under-represented (cotton, sugar, cocoa, soy, and palm oil, in addition to Organic certification). The review also identifies countries which appear to be under-represented in the literature, including Brazil, Australia, Malaysia, the Ivory Coast, and the United States. When measuring success, economic indicators are the most frequently evaluated, and only 20% of studies analyze economic, social, and environmental indicators simultaneously. When grouped by case, the indicator results tend to be positive on average (51%), followed by no difference (41%) and negative (8%) outcomes. There are no significant differences among sustainability pillars in terms of the average proportion of positive and negative results. These findings should be interpreted carefully, since the evidence base is heavily weighted towards coffee certification (75% of cases analyzed), and impacts are highly context dependent. Finally, the review identifies best practices in conducting robust evaluations, including the importance of addressing sustainability trade-offs and appropriately measuring environmental outcomes. While significant gaps remain, the findings indicate an increase in research credibly measuring VSS impacts.Rebecca TraldiElsevierarticleVoluntary sustainability standardsAgricultureImpact evaluationEvidence synthesisEcologyQH540-549.5ENEcological Indicators, Vol 125, Iss , Pp 107490- (2021)
institution	DOAJ
collection	DOAJ
language	EN
topic	Voluntary sustainability standards Agriculture Impact evaluation Evidence synthesis Ecology QH540-549.5
spellingShingle	Voluntary sustainability standards Agriculture Impact evaluation Evidence synthesis Ecology QH540-549.5 Rebecca Traldi Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
description	Over the last decade, there have been increasing calls for robust impact evaluations of voluntary agricultural sustainability standards (VSS’s). In response, this study reviews the literature regarding 13 major agricultural standards, asking: where are certified crops being studied? Which sustainability outcomes and indicators are measured? And finally, what does the current evidence base suggest about VSS outcomes? The analysis of 45 peer-reviewed articles suggests a mismatch between what is certified and what is studied. Some crops and standards are over-represented in the literature as compared to their amount of certified production (e.g. coffee and Fairtrade certification), while others are under-represented (cotton, sugar, cocoa, soy, and palm oil, in addition to Organic certification). The review also identifies countries which appear to be under-represented in the literature, including Brazil, Australia, Malaysia, the Ivory Coast, and the United States. When measuring success, economic indicators are the most frequently evaluated, and only 20% of studies analyze economic, social, and environmental indicators simultaneously. When grouped by case, the indicator results tend to be positive on average (51%), followed by no difference (41%) and negative (8%) outcomes. There are no significant differences among sustainability pillars in terms of the average proportion of positive and negative results. These findings should be interpreted carefully, since the evidence base is heavily weighted towards coffee certification (75% of cases analyzed), and impacts are highly context dependent. Finally, the review identifies best practices in conducting robust evaluations, including the importance of addressing sustainability trade-offs and appropriately measuring environmental outcomes. While significant gaps remain, the findings indicate an increase in research credibly measuring VSS impacts.
format	article
author	Rebecca Traldi
author_facet	Rebecca Traldi
author_sort	Rebecca Traldi
title	Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
title_short	Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
title_full	Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
title_fullStr	Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
title_full_unstemmed	Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
title_sort	progress and pitfalls: a systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards
publisher	Elsevier
publishDate	2021
url	https://doaj.org/article/1d11062ad6364e43bfd1d942e8de440c
work_keys_str_mv	AT rebeccatraldi progressandpitfallsasystematicreviewoftheevidenceforagriculturalsustainabilitystandards
_version_	1718405767423328256

Progress and pitfalls: A systematic review of the evidence for agricultural sustainability standards

Ejemplares similares