A participatory assessment of agro-ecosystem sustainability in Abesard,Iran

Participatory approaches have emerged in developing countries as an integrated and holistic system approach for assessing the agro-ecosystem sustainability. The aim is to integrate and apply knowledge about natural and social aspects of agro-ecosystems, taking into account their long-term, uncertain and non-linear relationships. The purpose of the study described in this paper was to assess the sustainability of the agro-ecosystem of Abesard in Tehran Province. A participatory landscape/lifescape appraisal (PLLA) method was used within an agro-ecological framework to assess the farmers’ sense of agricultural sustainability based on different categories of sustainability (better-off, average and poor). Results indicated that a majority of farmers think of sustainability solely as an economic issue, followed by sustainability being a combination of ecological and social concerns. Regarding the indicators of sustainability, results revealed that for farmers in the poor group, resilience and stability were critical criteria, whereas for better-off farmers, stability, reliability and resilience were generally important. However, the average group of the farmers was placed between the two groups. Overall, it was concluded that the economic status of households has an influence on the sustainability of their agro-ecosystems and that improvement of their economic situation promotes agricultural sustainability. It could also be concluded that PLLA has the potential to integrate socio-economic (lifescape) and environmental (landscape) dimensions for analysing the sustainability of agro-ecosystems.     

An assessment of the impact of watershed programmes on agricultural sustainability in Hamedan province,Iran

This paper assessed the effects of watershed programmes (WPs) on the sustainability of agro-ecosystems in Hamedan province, western Iran. This research was a causal–comparative study, and various techniques were used to collect data, such as survey data, archival data, observations, and face-to-face interviews with key informants. The causal–comparative method requires a comparison of agro-ecosystems with and without WPs. Therefore, a survey was conducted using a stratified random sampling to select 136 households in agro-ecosystems with and without WPs. Nine indicators were selected to evaluate sustainability. Significant differences were found between the two agro-ecosystems in biodiversity, soil quality management, hydrological processes, energy-use efficiency (EUE), access to public services, farm management practices, and social capital. No significant variation was found in the indicator of quality of life, even though that indicator was found to be slightly higher in the agro-ecosystem that had WPs. Results revealed that the agro-ecosystem with WPs, with the exception of the social capital, productivity, biodiversity, soil quality, EUE, farm management, and hydrological processes as well as access to public services had significantly higher values than the agro-ecosystem without WPs. Therefore, it can be concluded that despite WPs' positive impact on biodiversity, soil quality, hydrological processes, EUE, farm management, productivity, and access to public services, it had a negative impact on social capital. The findings suggest that WPs affected the agro-ecosystem by increasing the stability and economic viability of the agro-ecosystem and decreasing social dimensions. A new approach, including demand-driven WPs rather than supply-driven ones to cater to the specific needs of local people, was recommended for the promotion of the social acceptability of WPs.