<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<journal>
<title>SPACE ECONOMY &amp; RURAL DEVELOPMENT</title>
<title_fa>اقتصاد فضا و توسعه روستایی</title_fa>
<short_title>serd</short_title>
<subject>Literature &amp; Humanities</subject>
<web_url>http://serd.khu.ac.ir</web_url>
<journal_hbi_system_id>1</journal_hbi_system_id>
<journal_hbi_system_user>admin</journal_hbi_system_user>
<journal_id_issn>2322-2131</journal_id_issn>
<journal_id_issn_online>2588-476X</journal_id_issn_online>
<journal_id_pii>8</journal_id_pii>
<journal_id_doi>10.66224/serd</journal_id_doi>
<journal_id_iranmedex></journal_id_iranmedex>
<journal_id_magiran></journal_id_magiran>
<journal_id_sid>14</journal_id_sid>
<journal_id_nlai>4444</journal_id_nlai>
<journal_id_science>13</journal_id_science>
<language>fa</language>
<pubdate>
	<type>jalali</type>
	<year>1394</year>
	<month>8</month>
	<day>1</day>
</pubdate>
<pubdate>
	<type>gregorian</type>
	<year>2015</year>
	<month>11</month>
	<day>1</day>
</pubdate>
<volume>4</volume>
<number>13</number>
<publish_type>online</publish_type>
<publish_edition>1</publish_edition>
<article_type>fulltext</article_type>
<articleset>
	<article>


	<language>fa</language>
	<article_id_doi></article_id_doi>
	<title_fa>ارزیابی و مقایسه سطوح پایداری در نظام تولید برنج شهرستان ساری</title_fa>
	<title>Evaluation and Comparison of Sustainability levels of Rice Production in Sari County </title>
	<subject_fa>تخصصي</subject_fa>
	<subject>Special</subject>
	<content_type_fa>پژوهشي</content_type_fa>
	<content_type>Research</content_type>
	<abstract_fa>&lt;p dir=&quot;RTL&quot; style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;هدف این تحقیق، ارزیابی و مقایسه سطح پایداری در نظام تولید برنج شهرستان ساری بوده است. 22 شاخص منفرد مربوط به جنبه&#8204;های اکولوژیکی، اقتصادی و اجتماعی پایداری انتخاب شده است و پس از تعیین مناسبت آن با شرایط محلی کشت برنج در شهرستان ساری، به بررسی 287 نفر از کشاورزان برنج&#8204;کار پرداخته شد. پرسشنامه&#8204;ای برای گردآوری داده&#8204;ها درباره عملیات کنونی کشاورزی در سه بخش الف) عملیات مدیریت زراعی؛ ب) عملکرد اقتصادی و ج) ویژگی&#8204;های اجتماعی هر مزرعه طراحی شد. روش&#8204;شناسی فرآیند تحلیل سلسله مراتبی (&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span dir=&quot;LTR&quot;&gt;AHP&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;) برای تعیین وزن با توجه به اهمیت نسبی و تأثیر شاخص&#8204;های اجتماعی، اقتصادی و اکولوژیکی بر پایداری کل، از طریق بررسی دیدگاه کارشناسان به&amp;shy;کار گرفته شده است. سپس از طریق ادغام شاخص&#8204;های ترکیبی مربوط به سه مؤلفه پایداری، شاخص ترکیبی نهایی پایداری ساخته شد. نتایج نشان داد که 77/17% و 66/53% نظام تولید برنج به ترتیب در وضعیت ناپایدار و بالقوه ناپایدار است. با وجود اینکه مؤلفه اجتماعی پایداری در سطح رضایت&#8204;بخشی قرار داشت اما جنبه&#8204;های اقتصادی و اکولوژیکی هنوز در وضعیت ضعیف پایداری قرار دارند. به&amp;shy;علاوه، پایداری مزرعه در بین کشاورزان استفاده کننده از روش مبارزه بیولوژیک، بذر کم&#8204;محصول، عملیات مدیریت اگرواکولوژیک، دارنده زمین&#8204;های یکپارچه و شرکت&#8204;کننده در برنامه&#8204;های آموزشی-ترویجی بیشتر بوده است. تحصیلات، نیروی کار خانوادگی، میزان خودمصرفی برنج، رابطه مثبت و مقدار برنج تولیدی، رابطه منفی معنی&#8204;داری با پایداری اکولوژیکی داشته است. سن، تجربه کشاورزی، تحصیلات و میزان خودمصرفی، رابطه مثبت معنی&#8204;دار با پایداری اجتماعی داشته است. همچنین تحصیلات، اندازه زمین، خودمصرفی، مقدار برنج تولیدی و شاخص بهره&#8204;وری نیز با پایداری اقتصادی دارای رابطه مثبت معنی&#8204;داری بوده است. &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p dir=&quot;RTL&quot;&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
</abstract_fa>
	<abstract>&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;Introduction&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle1&quot;&gt;It is difficult to measure sustainable agriculture as a multidimensional concept. While it is relatively&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;easy to express philosophical definitions of agriculture sustainability, providing an operational and&amp;nbsp;methodology definition for evaluating the level of sustainability is difficult. Different&amp;nbsp;methodological approaches have been formulated and developed to assess the sustainability levels&amp;nbsp;of sustainable agriculture. However, there is no consensus on a comprehensive framework for&amp;nbsp;identifying and selecting indicators, different scales of indicators, weighting and especially for&amp;nbsp;aggregating individual indicators into a final composite indicator and rating of sustainability level.&amp;nbsp;So, Evaluation of sustainable agriculture is an important challenge for agriculture researchers,&amp;nbsp;agents, and policymakers. A comprehensive approach for stability analysis is the complexity of&amp;nbsp;each other-need activities. That&amp;#39;s why we need a comprehensive analytical framework for&amp;nbsp;evaluating sustainable agriculture development and use. This study presents a certain&amp;nbsp;methodological approach to evaluate and determine the sustainability of agricultural production at&amp;nbsp;farm-scale which integrates all the individual indicators of ecological, economic and social stability&amp;nbsp;into a comprehensive final index. In a case study, in order to test the proposed methodology, 22&amp;nbsp;individual indicators were selected. Then, a local condition of rice cultivation in Sari County was&amp;nbsp;studied through an open review of 287 rice farmers.&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;Methodology&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle1&quot;&gt;Agricultural sustainability can be evaluated at different spatial scales including field, regional,&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;national and even international measures. However, due to the specific conditions of each region, its&amp;nbsp;natural environment, socio-economic conditions and agricultural techniques, necessity of a&amp;nbsp;transparent scale is unavoidable. Most national indicators are not applicable at the scale of&amp;nbsp;individual farms which are the purpose of the intended operations. In this study, 22 single index&amp;nbsp;fields were selected to demonstrate and test the proposed methodology in a specific case study.&amp;nbsp;Then, its relevance to the local conditions of rice cultivation in Sari County was studied by&amp;nbsp;examining 287 rice farmers. Considering relative importance and impact of social, economic and&amp;nbsp;ecological factors on the total sustainability, a methodology of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP)&amp;nbsp;was applied by exploring the views of experts to determine the weight. Finally, the final composite&amp;nbsp;indicator of sustainability was created through the integration of the three components of&amp;nbsp;sustainability. A questionnaire was designed to collect data for the current farming operations. It&amp;nbsp;consisted of three parts, namely: a) agricultural land management practices; b) economic&amp;nbsp;performance and c) social characteristics of each farm. The questionnaire was designed in such a&amp;nbsp;way to be completed in the shortest possible time. Thus, it was consisted of useful sections for&amp;nbsp;measuring and providing information related to the entire system of agricultural production.&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;div style=&quot;text-align: justify; &quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle2&quot;&gt;Discussion and conclusion&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;The results of this study indicate that 17.77% and 53.66% of rice production system is unstable and&amp;nbsp;potentially unstable. While the sustainability level of social component was standing in a&amp;nbsp;satisfactory situation, the sustainability level of economic and ecological components was still&amp;nbsp;changing. In addition, farm sustainability was higher for those farmers using the method of&amp;nbsp;biological control, low-product seed, agro-ecological management practices, owners of integrated&amp;nbsp;land and participants in training and extension courses. The level of education, family labor, and the&amp;nbsp;amount of self-consumption of rice are factors of positive and direct relations with ecological&amp;nbsp;sustainability. On the other hand, the amount of rice production causes significant negative effects&amp;nbsp;on it. Age, farming experience, level of education and the amount of self-consumption show a&amp;nbsp;positive significant relation with social sustainability. In addition, education, land size, selfconsumption, the amount of produced rice and productivity index are in a significant positive&amp;nbsp;relation with economic sustainability. In general, factors including education, extension&amp;nbsp;communication, attending training courses and the information source of consumption play a key&amp;nbsp;role in the increasing of farmers&amp;#39; awareness. In this study, to evaluate and compare the sustainability&amp;nbsp;of agricultural production system in farm scale, a methodology framework has been provided by the&amp;nbsp;combination of three components of sustainability, i.e. economic, social and environmental. However, it cannot be claimed that the proposed methodology is quite authentic to&amp;nbsp;evaluate the complicated phenomenon of sustainability. Different facilitating assumptions are&amp;nbsp;required for the use of this methodology. Of course, it has several advantages and also can be used&amp;nbsp;for different purposes. Thus, the following hints are noteworthy in the methodology section:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle3&quot;&gt;- &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;Variables and indicators of sustainability should be selected according to the specific&amp;nbsp;circumstances and context of each area and the topic at hand, as well.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle3&quot;&gt;- &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;Validation and preliminary test of indicators is ensuring their appropriateness and being&amp;nbsp;measurable in the current conditions of any region.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle3&quot;&gt;- &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;Weight allocation model based on the views of experts and AHP, can obviously show the&amp;nbsp;importance of individual indicators in the final integrated one.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle3&quot;&gt;- &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;The integration of the three components of sustainability into the final one should be due to the&amp;nbsp;relative weight of the components.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br&gt;
&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle3&quot;&gt;- &lt;/span&gt;&lt;span class=&quot;fontstyle0&quot;&gt;In the process of making indicators, positive and negative effects of indicators on the overall&amp;nbsp;sustainability must be considered.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
</abstract>
	<keyword_fa>پایداری کشاورزی, ارزیابی پایداری, شاخص‌های پایداری, نظام تولید برنج.</keyword_fa>
	<keyword>agricultural sustainability, sustainability assessment, sustainability indicators, rice producing system.</keyword>
	<start_page>111</start_page>
	<end_page>135</end_page>
	<web_url>http://serd.khu.ac.ir/browse.php?a_code=A-10-2-9&amp;slc_lang=fa&amp;sid=1</web_url>


<author_list>
	<author>
	<first_name>Gholamhossein</first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Abdollahzadeh</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa>غلامحسین</first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa>عبدالله زاده</last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email>abdollahzade1@gmail.com</email>
	<code>10031947532846001781</code>
	<orcid>10031947532846001781</orcid>
	<coreauthor>Yes
</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Assistant Professor of Rural and Agricultural Development, Faculty of Agricultural Management, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran</affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa>استادیار توسعه روستایی و کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران</affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


	<author>
	<first_name>Mohammad Sharif</first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name>Sharifzadeh</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa>محمدشریف</first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa>شریف زاده</last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email></email>
	<code>10031947532846001782</code>
	<orcid>10031947532846001782</orcid>
	<coreauthor>No</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Associated Professor of Agricultural Extension and Education, Faculty of Agricultural Management, Gorgan University of Agricultural Sciences and Natural Resources, Gorgan, Iran</affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa>دانشیار ترویج و آموزش کشاورزی، دانشگاه علوم کشاورزی و منابع طبیعی گرگان، گرگان، ایران</affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


	<author>
	<first_name>Alireza</first_name>
	<middle_name></middle_name>
	<last_name> Khajeshahkohi</last_name>
	<suffix></suffix>
	<first_name_fa>علیرضا</first_name_fa>
	<middle_name_fa></middle_name_fa>
	<last_name_fa>خواجه شاهکویی</last_name_fa>
	<suffix_fa></suffix_fa>
	<email></email>
	<code>10031947532846001783</code>
	<orcid>10031947532846001783</orcid>
	<coreauthor>No</coreauthor>
	<affiliation>Assistant Professor of Geography and Rural Planning, Faculty of Human Sciences, Golestan University, Gorgan, Iran</affiliation>
	<affiliation_fa>استادیار جغرافیا و برنامه ریزی روستایی، دانشکده علوم انسانی، دانشگاه گلستان، گرگان، ایران</affiliation_fa>
	 </author>


</author_list>


	</article>
</articleset>
</journal>
