FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4313207546> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4313207546 abstract "<p><strong>Background.</strong> In the future, the production of cattle will be increasingly affected by the reduction of natural resources, particularly land and water, and by the competition between food and feed, therefore, the evaluation of the sustainability of production systems, is increasingly important. <strong>Objective.</strong> The objective of this study was to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the Sustainability of Food and Agricultural Systems (SAFA) and Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) methodologies, as tools to assess the sustainability of cattle production systems. <strong>Methodology.</strong> The SAFA and LCA methodologies were theoretically evaluated and applied to three production systems for grazing cattle in the Mexican tropics. <strong>Results.</strong> The results show that the advantages of SAFA with respect to LCA are: having a friendlier and more agile format and not requiring expert evaluators for its management, however, it has the disadvantage that it does not allow for accurate identification, within 21 topics that it evaluates, of the results of each indicator (116 in total). This could hinder the proposal of measures to improve the performance of the systems. While LCA is a methodology by which objective, detailed and standardized evaluations are carried out, but the disadvantages of this tool are that it requires experts and can be more expensive than SAFA due to the use of specialized software. <strong>Implications.</strong> The results of this study help to identify the strengths and weaknesses of SAFA and LCA methodologies, allowing evaluators of the sustainable performance of livestock systems to decide which methodology suits their interests. <strong>Conclusion.</strong> It is concluded that both tools are useful for evaluating the sustainability of livestock systems but with different objectives and scopes. Likewise, the validity of the results in both methodologies depends on the quality, veracity and transparency of the data used.</p>" @default.
• W4313207546 created "2023-01-06" @default.
• W4313207546 creator A5012808925 @default.
• W4313207546 creator A5034436347 @default.
• W4313207546 creator A5051909245 @default.
• W4313207546 creator A5065991278 @default.
• W4313207546 creator A5071474386 @default.
• W4313207546 date "2020-10-13" @default.
• W4313207546 modified "2023-10-04" @default.
• W4313207546 title "ANÁLISIS COMPARATIVO DE DOS HERRAMIENTAS PARA EVALUAR LA SOSTENIBILIDAD GANADERA EN EL CONTEXTO" @default.
• W4313207546 doi "https://doi.org/10.56369/tsaes.2871" @default.
• W4313207546 hasPublicationYear "2020" @default.
• W4313207546 type Work @default.
• W4313207546 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4313207546 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4313207546 hasAuthorship W4313207546A5012808925 @default.
• W4313207546 hasAuthorship W4313207546A5034436347 @default.
• W4313207546 hasAuthorship W4313207546A5051909245 @default.
• W4313207546 hasAuthorship W4313207546A5065991278 @default.
• W4313207546 hasAuthorship W4313207546A5071474386 @default.
• W4313207546 hasBestOaLocation W43132075461 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C118518473 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C134560507 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C139719470 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C144133560 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C162324750 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C18903297 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C2778348673 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C2778706760 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C37621935 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C39432304 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C66204764 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConcept C86803240 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C118518473 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C134560507 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C139719470 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C144133560 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C162324750 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C18903297 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C2778348673 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C2778706760 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C37621935 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C39432304 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C66204764 @default.
• W4313207546 hasConceptScore W4313207546C86803240 @default.
• W4313207546 hasIssue "3" @default.
• W4313207546 hasLocation W43132075461 @default.
• W4313207546 hasOpenAccess W4313207546 @default.
• W4313207546 hasPrimaryLocation W43132075461 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W1845361292 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W2179439461 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W2784209998 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W2997953946 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W3021014472 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W3023633664 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W3140285700 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W4238454101 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W4238467779 @default.
• W4313207546 hasRelatedWork W4309190203 @default.
• W4313207546 hasVolume "23" @default.
• W4313207546 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4313207546 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4313207546 workType "article" @default.