A variety of established tools are available for agricultural sustainability assessment at global, regional, and farm geographical scales. However, no assessment has been reported in research literature to indicate their ability to provide insights about the most sustainable cropping system at plot level or experimental unit. Despite the environmental and social importance of soil in agricultural systems, many of the sustainability assessments use few or no indicators related to soil properties or processes. Hence, we propose a sustainability assessment methodology oriented to soil-associated agricultural experiments (SMAES) by defining its parameters through simulations and testing the methodology with real data from a fertilization tomato experiment with five treatments: chemical control (CR); organic control (OR); and organic:chemical ratios (OR) of 25:75, 50:50, and 75:25. The distance from the maximum, principal component analysis, and product of weighted indicator techniques were chosen for normalization, weighting, and aggregation in a single index process, respectively. Applying the SMAES methodology, the sustainability level of the treatments followed this sequence: CR (0.95) > O25:C75 (0.73) > O50:C50 (0.60) > O75:C25 (0.55) > OR (0.45). The proposed SMAES methodology allows soil researchers to define the best treatment through the interaction of the environmental, social, and economic dimensions of agricultural systems.

In the current study, for the main crops cultivated in the Campania region (South of Italy), three indicators were proposed and analysed. The blue water footprint (WFb), which gives an indication of the impact of irrigation on the water resource; the gross margin WFb (GMWFb), describing the economic productivity of irrigation; and the job WFb (JWFb) that expresses the social value of blue water in terms of job opportunities. Results confirmed that water applied through irrigation is much higher compared with crop requirements. In terms of GMWFb, silage maize, maize and alfalfa had the highest values, while olive, potato and tomato had the lowest. Concerning JWFb, silage maize was the crop with the highest value. Even though a deeper analysis should be done in terms of added value in the entire supply chain, the results indicated a clear difference between the crops related to animal feeding (alfalfa, maize) and the other crops taken into consideration. In fact, for the former, both the GMWFb and the JWFb achieved their highest values. Results showed that for certain irrigation volumes and for certain crops, the economic and social impacts are very different and the choice of an irrigated crop rather than another has different repercussions in terms of environmental and socio-economic sustainability. The proposed indicators would allow water managers and farmers to assess and compare production systems in terms of the different benefits that their use of water can provide.

Fiscal discipline is commonly evaluated on the basis of the debt–gross domestic product ratio, which exhibits a stock variable measured relative to a flow variable. This way of monitoring debt solvency is arguably not consistent with transversality conditions obtained from optimizing macroeconomic frameworks. In this paper, we consider a wealth-based sustainability index of government debt policy derived from a baseline endogenous growth model. We calculate the index from 1999 onward for countries in which the after-growth real interest rate is positive, consistently with the theoretical setup. Results are radically different from common wisdom. We show that the fiscal position is sustainable for both Germany and Italy, and strongly unsustainable for both Japan and France. Policy implications of our findings are discussed.

United States farm policy has a long tradition of subsidizing farmers in order to achieve national goals. The issue of agricultural subsidies poses a particular challenge in terms of relevant policy design. This paper explores the potential for economic indicators to guide policies that encourage sustainable agriculture through alternative-oriented approaches. We begin by reviewing several indicators of sustainable agriculture that have been proposed previously. We then suggest a set of three economic indicators: energy and machinery use, creation of local jobs, and feed balance, and apply them to two groups of farmers: conventional farmers and those with an explicit orientation towards sustainable agriculture. Though our survey groups cannot be compared statistically, it appears that these three indicators are capable of distinguishing between the two farmer groups. We conclude with some suggestions for further research and application.