A comparison of complex expert-based assessment versus quickscan assessment

Past decades, various sustainability assessments emerged, ranging from very complex expert-based assessments to quick scan ones. The former type is based on expert information and an extensive data demand, the latter on information gathered instantly from the farmer. This research compares both types while using the following criteria: i) the design approach and characteristics, ii) the critical succes factors for implementation put forward by De Mey et al. (2011), iii) results in the field and evaluation by the end-users. As an example for an expert-based assessment, we used MOTIFS (Meul et al. 2008) designed for dairy farming in Flanders. We applied this tool on Flemish dairy farms within the EU-Interreg project Dairyman. The OCIS Public Goods tool (Gerard et al. 2011), designed for organic dairy farms in Great Britain was used as example of a quickscan method. During the EU project SOLID, the tool was adjusted for the entire European region and applied on organic dairy farms. This research determines the strenghts and weaknesses of both types of sustainability assessment systems. This will result in suggestions on which type of sustainablity assessment is relevant depending on the case, related to the critical succes factors such as attitude of model users, time and data availability, user friendliness, communication aid, etc. Researchers and practitioners can use this information when developing or selecting, and possibly modifying, an appropriate tool for their goals.