Skip to main content

Modeling the Interactions Between Agriculture and the Environment

  • Chapter
Handbook Of Operations Research In Natural Resources

Part of the book series: International Series In Operations Research amp; Mana ((ISOR,volume 99))

Modeling agricultural systems that recognize the environmental dimensions of agriculture has evolved during the two past decades. Multi-objective mathematical models encompassed the diversity of objectives inherent in agricultural activities as a result of externalities and replaced single objective models. It has been observed that recent modeling efforts at farm level combined several simulation models at a time (crop simulation, weed simulation, hydrologic model, erosion) with a multi-criteria model. Many of the studies reviewed have not thoroughly considered the policy instruments to internalize the pollution problems and some studies have not considered any policy instrument. The multicriteria techniques used range from distance based approach, utility theory, generating methods, interactive methods, fractional programming and fuzzy programming. The later method is called for to deal with the inexact information generated with geographical information systems GIS or simulation models. Most applications of coupled GIS and decision models dealt with watershed management and soil erosion. Spatial GIS/multicriteria models that involve stakeholders are considered as a form of institutional reorganization which will help change the hierarchical mode of decision making. Stakeholder involvement in decision making has brought the modeling effort to include group and multiple decision makers. It is expected that future models will integrate several simulation models, GIS, and several stakeholders and would be applied at regional and national levels. Thus, multicriteria modelers will have to deal with uncertain and inexact information as well as asymmetric information.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Agrell, P.J., Stam, A., Fisher, G.W. 2004. Interactive multiobjective agro-ecological land use planning: The Bungoma Region in Kenya. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 158: 194-217.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Annetts, J.E., Audsley, E. 2002. Multiple objective linear programming for environmental farm planning. J. Oper. Res. Soc. 53: 933-943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arondel, C., Girardin, P. 2000. Sorting cropping systems on the basis of their impact on groundwater quality. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 127: 467-482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arzt, K. 2003. How to cope with agricultural-environmental problems? “Round tables” and their potentials to solve and avoid environmental problems in the field of agriculture. In Frontiers 2: European Applications in Ecological Economics. Tenerife, Spain, February 12-15, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Campus, F., Tellarini, V., Andreoli, E., Silvestri, N., Mazzoncini, M. 1999. Economic and environmental impact of input reduction in biennial rotations. In Agriculture Beyond Production. Maria Andreoli (Editor). University of Pisa. Edizioni II Borghetto, Pisa, Italy.

    Google Scholar 

  • Castrodeza, C., Lara, P., Pena, T. 2005. Multicriteria fractional model for feed formulation: Economic, nutritional and environmental criteria. Agr. Syst. 86(1): 76-96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chang, C., McCarl, B. 1991. Scope of ASM: The US Agricultural Sector Model. Working paper. Texas Agricultural Experiment Station, Texas A'M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillon, C.R. 1992. Economic Analysis of Edwards Aquifers Water Management. Ph.D. Dissertation. Texas AM University. Texas, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Falconer, K., Hodge, I. 2001. Pesticide taxation and multi-objective policy making: Farm modelling to evaluate profit/environment trade-offs. Ecol. Econ. 36: 263-279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Feinerman, E.D., Bosh, D., Pease, J. 2004. Manure applications and nutrient standards. Am. J. Agr. Econ. 86(1): 14-25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gandonou, J.M., Dillon, C. 2003. Precision Agriculture, Whole Field Farming and Irrigation Practices: A Financial Risk Analysis. Paper selected for the American Agricultural Eco-nomics Association, Montreal, Canada, July 27-30, 2003. www sweb.uky.edu/∼jgand0/Research.htm.

  • Giasson, E., Bryant, R.B., Bills, N.L. 2002. Environmental and economic optimization of dairy manure management: A mathematical programming approach. Agron. J. 94: 757-766.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Giupponi, C., Cogan, V., La Jeunesse, I. 2002. EU Water Policy: Research Developments and New Management Tools. Working paper WP02-13. Center for International Food and Agriculture Policy, University of Minnesota.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gomez-Limon, J.A., Riesgo, L. Arriaza, M. 2003. Multicriteria analysis of factors use level: The case of water for irrigation. Paper presented for the 25th International Conference of Agricutural Economists, August 16-22, 2003, Durban, South Africa.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hajkowicz, S. Prato, T. 1998. Multiple Objective Decision Analysis of Farming Systems in Goodwater Creek Watershed. University of Missouri, Columbia. CARES Research Report #24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayashi, K. 2000. Multicriteria analysis for agricultural resource management: A critical survey and future perspectives. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 122: 486-500.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hayashi, K. 2003. A multi-objective programming approach for evaluating agri-environ-mental policy. In Multi-Objective Programming and Goal Programming: Theory and Applications. Tanino, T., Tanaka, T., and Inuiguchi, M. (Editors). Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, pp. 333-338.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hazell, P., Norton, R. 1986. Mathematical Programming for Economic Analysis in Agriculture. The Johns Hopkins University Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckelei, T., Britz, W. 2001. Concept and Explorative Application of an EU-wide, Regional Agricultural Sector Model (Capri-Project). Institute of Agricultural Policy, University of Bonn, Bonn.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hoag, D., Page, S., Ascough, II, J. 1999. Using the analytical hierarchy process to determine economic and environmental tradeoffs on farms. Paper presented to the 2nd International Conference on Multiple Objective Decision Support Systems for Land, Water and Environmental Management, MODSS’99.

    Google Scholar 

  • Horan, R.D., Ribaudo, M., Abler, D.G. 2001. Voluntary and indirect approaches for reducing externalities and satisfying multiple objectives, Chapter 3. In Environmental Policies for Agricultural Pollution Control. Shortle, J.S. and Abler, D. (Editors). CAB International, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  • Janssen, R., Goosen, H., Verhoeven, M.L., Verhoeven, J.T.A., Omtzigt, A.Q.A., Maltby, E. 2005. Decision support for integrated wetland management. Environ. Modell. Softw. 20(2): 215-229.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, A.L., Thysen, I., Boll, P.S., Hansen, J.G., Secher, B.J.M., Juhl, O. 1997. Pl@nteInfo - Using the Internet for Custom Tailored Crop Information. www.planteinfo.dk/information/ publikationer/efita97.

  • Jean dit Balleul, P., Rivest, J., Dubeau, C., Pomar, C. 2001. Reducing nitrogen excretion in pigs by modifying the traditional least-cost formulation algorithm. Livest. Prod. Sci. 72: 199-211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jones, A.C., El-Swaify, S.A., Graham, R., Stonehouse, D.P., Whitehouse, I. 1998. A synthesis of the state-of-the-art on multiple objective decision making for managing land, water and the environment. In Multiple Objective Decision Making for Land, Water, and Environmental Management. El-Swaify, S.A. and Yakowitz, D.S. (Editors). Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp. 719-729.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, D., Barnes, E.M. 2000. Fuzzy composite programming to combine remote sensing and crop models for decision support in precision crop management. Agr. Syst. 65: 137-158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latacz-Lohmann, U. 2004. Dealing with limited information in designing and evaluating agri-environmental policy. Paper presented in 90th Seminar of the European Association of Agricultural Economists. Rennes, France, October 28-29, 2004.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lauwers, L., Van Huylenbroeck, G., Martens, L. 1998. A systems approach to analyse the effects of flemish manure policy on structural changes and cost abatement in pig farming. Agr. Syst. 56(2): 167-183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linares, P., Romero, C. 2002. Aggregation of preferences in an environmental economics context: A goal programming approach. Omega 30: 89-95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loyce, C., Rellier, J.P., Meynard, J.M. 2002. Management planning for winter wheat with multiple objectives (2); ethanol-wheat production. Agr. Syst. 72: 33-57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacKenzie, D. 2004. WTO Ruling may Spell End of Farmer's Subsidies. New Scientist.Com www.newscientist.com/hottopics/pollution.

  • McCarl, B.A., Spreen, T.H. 1980. Price endogenous mathematical programming as a tool for sector analysis. Am. J. Agr. Econ. 62: 87-102.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCarl, B.A. 1992. Mathematical Programming for Resource Policy Appraisal under Multiple Objectives. Working paper #6. Texas A'M University, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  • McMaster, G.S., Ascough, J.C., Shaffer, M.J., Byrne, P.F., Haley, S.D., Neilsen, D.C., Andales, A.A., Dunn, G.H., Weltz, M.A., Ahuja, L.R. 2002. Parameterizing GPFARM: An Agricultural Decision Support System for Integrating Science, Economics, Resource Use and Environment. www.iemss.org/iemss2002/proceedings/pdf/volume20uno/293_mcmaster.pdf

  • Meyer-Aurich, A., Matthes, U., Osinki, E. 2001. Integrating sustainability in agriculture: Trade-offs and economic consequences demonstrated with a farm model. Paper presented to the American Agricultural Economics Association Annual Meeting 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morari, F., Lugato, E., Borin, M. 2004. An integrated non-point source model-GIS system for selecting criteria of best management practices in the Po Valley, North Italy. Agr. Ecosyst. Environ. 1002: 247-262.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Munda, G. 2004. Social multi-criteria evaluation: Methodological foundations and operational consequences. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 158: 662-667.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. 2001. Environmental Indicators for Agriculture. Volume 3. Methods and Results. Paris.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Connor, M. 2000. Pathways for environmental evaluation: A walk in the (Hanging) Gardens of Babylon. Ecol. Econ. 34: 175-193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pacini, C., Giesen, G., Wossink, A., Omodei-Zorini, L., Huirne, R. 2004. The EU's Agenda 2000 reform and the sustainability of organic farming in Tuscany: Ecological-economic modelling at field and farm level. Agr. Syst. 80: 171-197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Psychoudakis, A., Aggelopoulos, S., Dimitriadou, E. 2002. Agricultural land use in an environmentally sensitive area: An assessment of an agri-environmental policy measure. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. 45(4): 481-491.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ridier, A., Jacquet, F. 2002. Decoupling direct payments and the dynamics of decisions under price risk in cattle farms. J. Agr. Econ. 53(3), 549-565.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinner, C. 2003. Web-based spatial decision support: Status and research directions. J. Geogr. Inf. Decision Anal. 7(1), 14-31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C., Rehman, T. 1987. Natural resource management and the use of multiple criteria decision-making techniques. Eur. Rev. Agric. Econ. 14(1), 76-89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C. 2001. Extended lexicographic goal programming: A unifying approach. Omega 29: 63-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C., Rehman, T. 2003. Multiple Criteria Analysis for Agricultural Decisions, Second Edition, Elsevier, Amsterdam.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C. 2004. A general structure of achievement function for a goal programming model. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 153: 675-686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schneider, U., McCarl, B. 2000. The Agricultural Sector and Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Model (ASMGHG). Unpublished paper, Department of Agricultural Economics, Texas A'M University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stagl, S. 2003. Multicriteria evaluation and public participation: In search for theoretical foundations. Paper presented in Frontiers 2: European Applications in Ecological Economics. Tenerife, Spain, February 12-15, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stokes, J.R., Tozer, P.R. 2002. Cost minimization and managing soil nutrient loading: Conflict or compromise? Can. J. Agr. Econ. 50, 151-169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stonehouse, D.P., de Vos, G.W., Weersink, A. 2002. Livestock manure systems for swine finishing enterprises. Agr. Syst. 73: 279-296.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tulloch, D.L., Myers, J.R., Hasse, J.E., Parks, J.P., Lathrop, R.G. 2003. Integrating GIS into Farmland Preservation Policy and decision making. Landscape Urban Plan. 63: 33-48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Huylenbroeck, G., Jacobs, G., Vanrolleghem, P. 2000. A simulation model to evaluate the impact of environmental programmes on dairy farms. Int. Trans. Oper. Res. 7: 171-183.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veith, T.L. 2002. Agricultural BMP Placement for Cost-Effective Pollution Control at the Watershed Level. Ph.D. Dissertation. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. www.scholar.lib.vt.edu/theses/available/etd-04252002-132437/unrestricted/etd.PDF

  • Vickner, S., Hoag, D. 1998. Advances in ration formulation for beef cattle through multiple objective decision support systems. In Multiple Objective Decision Making for Land, Water, and Environmental Management. El-Swaify, S.A. and Yakowitz, D.S. (Editors). Lewis Publishers, Boca Raton, pp. 291-298.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wang, X., Yu, S., Huang, G.H. 2004. Land allocation based on integrated GIS-optimization modeling at watershed level. Landscape Urban Plan. 66: 61-74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Westra, J.V., Easter, K.W, Olson, K.D. 2002. Targeting Nonpoint Source Pollution Control: Phosphorus in the Minnesota River Basin. Journal of the American Water Resources Association. 38(2): 493-505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Woodward, R. 2003. Lessons about effluent trading from a single trade. Rev. Agric. Econ. 25 (1): 235-245.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yaldir, A.K., Rehman, T. 2002. A methodology for constructing multicriteria decision support systems for agricultural land consolidation using GIS and API: An illustration from Turkey. Comput. Electron. Agr. 36:55-78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeng, G., Duan, S., Hu, H. 2004. On precision agriculture and the construction of agriculture sustainable-developing ability in China. Paper presented in the AFITA/WCCA Joint Congress on Information Technology in Agriculture. www.afitaandwcca2004.net/html/paper/2-On_Precision.pdf.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Zekri, S., Boughanmi, H. (2007). Modeling the Interactions Between Agriculture and the Environment. In: Weintraub, A., Romero, C., Bjørndal, T., Epstein, R., Miranda, J. (eds) Handbook Of Operations Research In Natural Resources. International Series In Operations Research amp; Mana, vol 99. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71815-6_5

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics