How Organic Farming Can Become a Driver of Sustainability, and How Its Study Reveals the (un-) Consistency of Sustainability Indicators and Strategies-Journal of Sustainability Research-CSCIED科技核心评价数据库-手机版

How Organic Farming Can Become a Driver of Sustainability, and How Its Study Reveals the (un-) Consistency of Sustainability Indicators and Strategies

How Organic Farming Can Become a Driver of Sustainability, and How Its Study Reveals the (un-) Consistency of Sustainability Indicators and Strategies

ES评分 0 浏览量：97 下载量：0

全文阅读下载引用收藏

DOI	10.20900/jsr20250071
刊名	Journal of Sustainability Research JSR
年，卷(期)	2025, 7(4)
作者	Csilla Mile*,Zoltán Bodrog,
作者单位	Keleti Károly Faculty of Business and Management, Óbuda University, Budapest 1034, Hungary ;
摘要	Global sustainability will self-evidently determine the outcome of the 21st century, and all further history of humanity. This is by far the largest management problem humanity has ever faced. Yet (or as a consequence), not only an adequate global answer to this question, but a comprehensive global effort or motivation for it is far from reality. We should therefore pay increased attention to forerunner economic sectors and trends in social change. In this paper, we begin with studying organic farming as such a forerunner and potential initiator of sustainability transition in other sectors, socioeconomic structures and activities; as well as patterns of its propagation and its connection with other sustainability trends beyond agriculture. Our goal is to understand which factors are essential, and which are indifferent in shaping a more rapidly extending and economically successful organic agriculture in the near future as a vital part of global sustainability transition. On this course of investigation, however, we end up discussing a wider range of indicators of sustainability, arriving at ambivalent, or even worrying conclusions regarding the overall landscape of possible sustainability strategies in the light of multidimensional indicator inconsistencies. Inconsistencies suggest that environmental sustainability is simply set to be neglected, even if we efficiently go towards the current sustainable development goals (SDG’s) of the United Nations.
Abstract	Global sustainability will self-evidently determine the outcome of the 21st century, and all further history of humanity. This is by far the largest management problem humanity has ever faced. Yet (or as a consequence), not only an adequate global answer to this question, but a comprehensive global effort or motivation for it is far from reality. We should therefore pay increased attention to forerunner economic sectors and trends in social change. In this paper, we begin with studying organic farming as such a forerunner and potential initiator of sustainability transition in other sectors, socioeconomic structures and activities; as well as patterns of its propagation and its connection with other sustainability trends beyond agriculture. Our goal is to understand which factors are essential, and which are indifferent in shaping a more rapidly extending and economically successful organic agriculture in the near future as a vital part of global sustainability transition. On this course of investigation, however, we end up discussing a wider range of indicators of sustainability, arriving at ambivalent, or even worrying conclusions regarding the overall landscape of possible sustainability strategies in the light of multidimensional indicator inconsistencies. Inconsistencies suggest that environmental sustainability is simply set to be neglected, even if we efficiently go towards the current sustainable development goals (SDG’s) of the United Nations.
关键词	organic farming; global sustainability; multidimensional sustainability; UN SDG’s; indicator consistency; policy evaluation
KeyWord	organic farming; global sustainability; multidimensional sustainability; UN SDG’s; indicator consistency; policy evaluation
基金项目
页码	-

参考文献
相关文献

1.Perrels A. Wavering between radical and realistic sustainable consumption policies: In search for the best feasible trajectories. J Clean Prod. 2008;16(11):1203-17. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2007.08.008.

2.Varga J, Csiszárik-Kocsir Á. The impact of human activity on environmental elements based on the results of a primary research. Acta Polytech Hung. 2024;21:12. doi: 10.12700/APH.21.12.2024.12.9.

3.Berlie AB. Global warming: A review of the debates on the causes, consequences and politics of global response. Ghana J Geogr. 2018;10(1):144-64. doi: 10.4314/gjg.v10i1.8.

4.Hoegh-Guldberg O, Jacob D, Taylor M, Guillén Bolaños T, Bindi M, Brown S, et al. The human imperative of stabilizing global climate change at 1.5 c. Science. 2019;365(6459):eaaw6974. doi: 10.1126/science.aaw6974.

5.Matthews HD, Wynes S. Current global efforts are insufficient to limit warming to 1.5 c. Science. 2022;376(6600):1404-9. doi: 10.1126/science.abo3378.

6.Steininger KW. Foreseeability of economic damages related to inadequate climate mitigation and adaptation. In: Climate change, responsibility and liability. Baden-Baden (Germany): Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft mbH & Co KG; 2022. p. 93-102.

7.Janetschek H, Brandi C, Dzebo A, Hackmann B. The 2030 agenda and the Paris agreement: Voluntary contributions towards thematic policy coherence. In: Making climate action more effective. London (UK): Routledge; 2021. doi: 10.4324/9781003162407.

8.Stoddard I, Anderson K, Capstick S, Carton W, Depledge J, Facer K, et al. Three decades of climate mitigation: Why haven’t we bent the global emissions curve? Annu Rev Environ Resour. 2021;46(1):653-89. doi: 10.1146/annurev-environ-012220-011104.

9.Ritchie H, Rosado P, Roser M. CO2 and greenhouse gas emissions. Our world in data. 2023. Available from: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-greenhouse-gas-emissions. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

10.Bodrog Z, Mile C, Tick A. Why fundamental methodologies of sustainability should resemble those of military logistics. In: Karaboyacı M, Beram A, Kandemir H, Özdemir S, editors. ICONST EST 2025: International conferences on science and technology engineering science and technology. Isparta (Turkey): Association of Kutbilge Academicians; 2025. p. 30.

11.Bodrog Z, Mile C. Rush for sustainability: Timeline-conscious technological retreat as the crucial tool. In: Szakál A, editor. IEEE 29th international conference on intelligent engineering systems, INES 2025. Piscataway (NJ, US): Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE); 2025. p. 279-84. doi: 10.1109/INES67149.2025.11078022.

12.Smith BG. Developing sustainable food supply chains. Philos Trans R Soc B Biol Sci. 2008;363(1492):849-61. doi: 10.1098/rstb.2007.2187.

13.Aceleanu MI. Sustainability and competitiveness of Romanian farms through organic agriculture. Sustainability. 2016;8(3):245. doi: 10.3390/su8030245.

14.Bellon S, Penvern S. Organic food and farming as a prototype for sustainable agricultures. In: Organic farming, prototype for sustainable agricultures: Prototype for sustainable agricultures. Dordrecht (Netherlands): Springer; 2014. p. 1-19. doi: 10.1007/978-94-007-7927-3_1.

15.Shmelev SE. Comparative multidimensional assessment of progress towards sustainability at the macro scale: The cases of 12 OECD countries, China, and Brazil. Sustainability. 2025;17:7772. doi: 10.3390/su17177772.

16.Shmelev SE. Interdisciplinary linkages among sustainability dimensions in the context of European cities and regions research. Sustainability. 2023;15:14738. doi: 10.3390/su152014738.

17.Bartee EM. A holistic view of problem solving. Manag Sci. 1973;20(4):439. doi: 10.1287/mnsc.20.4.439.

18.Shmelev SE. Biodiversity offset schemes for Indonesia: Pro et contra. Sustainability. 2025;17:6283. doi: 10.3390/su17146283.

19.Shmelev SE, Agbleze L, Spangenberg JH. Multidimensional ecosystem mapping: Towards a more comprehensive spatial assessment of nature’s contributions to people in France. Sustainability. 2023;15(9):7557. doi: 10.3390/su15097557.

20.Shmelev SE, Salnikov V, Turulina G, Polyakova S, Tazhibayeva T, Schnitzler T, et al. Climate change and food security: The impact of some key variables on wheat yield in Kazakhstan. Sustainability. 2021;13(15):8583. doi: 10.3390/su13158583.

21.Bodrog Z, Mile C. Environmentally conscious consumer behavior in generation Z—trends and motivations. In: Szakál A, editor. IEEE 23rd world symposium on applied machine intelligence and informatics SAMI 2025. Budapest (Hungary): IEEE; 2025. p. 477-81. doi: 10.1109/SAMI63904.2025.10883149.

22.Mile C. Environmentally conscious production—health-conscious consumption, present and future of organic farming in Hungary. In: Grata P, Kinal J, editors. Selected aspects of modernization processes in “younger europe”. past and present. Rzeszów (Poland): Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Rzeszowskiego; 2023. p. 183-205.

23.Bodrog Z, Mile C. “Vanishing” pax americana as the current rational choice for the United States. In: Keszthelyi A, Szikora P, editors. 23rd international conference on management, enterprise, benchmarking. proceedings I. (MEB 2025). Budapest (Hungary): Óbuda University; 2025. p. 178-89.

24.Towsley A, Pakianathan J, Douglass DH. Correlation angles and inner products: Application to a problem from physics. Int Scholarly Res Notices. 2011;2011(1):323864. doi: 10.5402/2011/323864.

25.Lo K, Miller E, Dworatzek P, Basnet N, Silva J, Van Berkum JL, et al. National ecological footprint and biocapacity accounts, 2025 edition. Data and metadata version 1.0. York (Canada): York University; Reykjavík (Iceland): University of Iceland; 2025. Available from: https://footprint.info.yorku.ca/data/ and https://data.footprintnetwork.org/. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

26.IMF. World economic outlook, October 2023. Washington (DC, US): International Monetary Fund; 2023. Available from: https://www.elibrary.imf.org/display/book/9798400235801/9798400235801.xml?cid=530522-com-dsp-crossref; https://www.imf.org/en/Publications/WEO/weo-database/2025/april/. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

27.Sachs JD, Lafortune G, Fuller G, Iablonovski G. Financing sustainable development to 2030 and mid-century. In: Sustainable development report 2025. Paris (France): SDSN; Dublin (Ireland): Dublin University Press; 2025. Available from: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/map/goals/SDG12. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

28.Interpreting the SDG index and dashboards results. In: Sustainable development report 2025. Paris (France): SDSN; Dublin (Ireland): Dublin University Press; 2025. Available from: https://dashboards.sdgindex.org/chapters/methodology/. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

29.FiBL. Data on organic agriculture worldwide, 2014–2022 years. Frick (Switzerland): Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL); 2024. Available from: https://statistics.fibl.org/world/area-world.html. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

30.Willer H, Trávníček HJ, Schlatter B, editors. The world of organic agriculture. statistics and emerging trends 2025. Frick (Switzerland): Research Institute of Organic Agriculture FiBL; Bonn (Germany): IFOAM—Organics International; 2025. Available from: https://www.fibl.org/fileadmin/documents/shop/1797-organic-world-2025.pdf. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

31.The Economist. Global price of a big mac as of January 2025, by country (in U.S. dollars). Statista. 2025 Feb 18. Available from: https://www.statista.com/statistics/274326/big-mac-index-global-prices-for-a-big-mac/. Accessed on 11 Jul 2025.

32.Wikimedia user Canuckguy et al. Blank world map. Wikimedia Commons. Available from: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4d/BlankMap-World.svg. Accessed on 10 Aug 2025.

33.Stern CW, Deimler MS. The Boston consulting group on strategy: Classic concepts and new perspectives: Second edition. Hoboken (NJ, US): John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2012. ISBN 0-471-75722-5.

34.Popovics A. Characteristics of consumer segments based on consumer habits and preferences from an environmental and social responsibility perspective. Acta Polytech Hung. 2024;21(12):133. doi: 10.12700/APH.21.12.2024.12.8.

35.Garai-Fodor M, Huszák N. Consumer awareness: Environmental consciousness, conscious lifestyle among generation Z based on primary data. Acta Polytech Hung. 2024;21(12):73. doi: 10.12700/APH.21.12.2024.12.5.

36.Radácsi L, Szigeti C. The illusion of the holy grail of decoupling: Are there countries with relatively high SDGI and moderately low ecological footprint? Environ Sustain Indic. 2024;22:100379. doi: 10.1016/j.indic.2024.100379.

37.Tundys B, Wiśniewski T. Benefit optimization of short food supply chains for organic products: A simulation-based approach. Appl Sci. 2020;10(8):2783. doi: 10.3390/app10082783.

38.Shmelev SE, Gilardi E. Sustainable business as a force for good in the context of climate change: An econometric modelling approach. Sustainability. 2025;17(4):1530. doi: 10.3390/su17041530.

39.Sousa M, Almeida MF, Calili R. Multiple criteria decision making for the achievement of the UN sustainable development goals: A systematic literature review and a research agenda. Sustainability. 2021;13(8):4129. doi: 10.3390/su13084129.

40.Francis (Jorge Mario Bergoglio). Laudato si’: Encyclical letter on care for our common home. Available from: http://www.vatican.va/content/francesco/en/encyclicals/documents/papa-francesco_20150524_enciclica-laudato-si.html. Accessed on 6 Nov 2025.

41.Saito K. Slow down: The degrowth manifesto. New York (NY, US): Astra Publishing House; 2024. ISBN 9781662602368.

引用本文

Csilla Mile*,Zoltán Bodrog. How Organic Farming Can Become a Driver of Sustainability, and How Its Study Reveals the (un-) Consistency of Sustainability Indicators and Strategies [J]. Journal of Sustainability Research. 2025; 7; (4). - .

文献评论

相关学者

相关机构