The decision-making process of farmers in the Spanish Mediterranean regions was analysed using the function of Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT). The economic, agronomic and social repercussions resulting from adopting a series of technological and structural improvements were evaluated on farms with citricultural and outdoor horticultural production. The introduction of such measures is necessary to improve competitiveness and favour the sustainability of these farms. The outstanding consequences of these innovations were a more efficient use of irrigation water and an increase in the area of vegetable cultivation when mechanized, which counteracted the overwhelming trend in the area towards citriculture.
AmadorF.SumpsiJ. M., and RomeroC. (1998), ‘A non-interactive methodology to assess the farmers' utility function: An application to large farms in Andalusia, Spain’, European Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol 25, pp 95–109.
2.
AulagnierM.GiraudG.ReggazziD.BertazzoliA.CaballeroP.CasesB.De MiguelMa D.CalatravaJ., and CañeroR. (2002), ‘Adaptation of fruit and vegetable production systems in Mediterranean Europe: An approach from the study of agricultural farms in four small regions of France, Italy and Spain’, Outlook on Agriculture, Vol 31, No 2, pp 79–85.
3.
BellD. E.KeeneyR. L., and RaiffaH., eds (1977), Decisions, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
4.
DyerJ. S. (1977), On the Relationship Between Goal Programming and Multiattribute Utility Theory, Discussion Paper 69, Management Study Centre, University of California, Berkeley, CA.
5.
EdwardsW., ed (1977), ‘Use of Multiattribute Utility Measurement for social decision making’, in BellD. E.KeeneyR. L., and RaiffaH., eds, Decisions, John Wiley & Sons, Chichester.
6.
FarmerP. C. (1987), ‘Testing the robustness of Multiattribute Utility Theory in an applied setting’, Decision Sciences, Vol 18, pp 178–193.
7.
Fernández-ZamudioMa A. (2003), ‘Viabilidad y competitividad en los sistemas hortofrutícolas mediterráneos según su grado de intensificación’, thesis, Universidad Politécnica de Valencia.
8.
FishburnP. C. ed (1982), The Foundations of Expected Utility, Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, Holland.
9.
Generalitat Valenciana (2002), Ley de Ordenación Territorial del Suelo Agrario y Modernización de las Estructuras Agrarias de la Comunidad Valenciana, DOGV No 4.266, 7 June, Valencia.
10.
Gómez-LimónJ. A.ArriazaM., and RiesgoL. (2003), ‘Agricultural risk aversion revisited: A multi-criteria decision-making approach’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol 151, No 3, pp 569–585.
11.
Gómez-LimónJ. A.SánchezF. J.RodríguezA., and LaraP. (1996) ‘Evaluación del impacto socioeconómico de la sequía en los regadíos de la Campiña Baja (Córdoba). Una aproximación multicriterio’, Revista Española de Economía Agraria, Vol 178, pp 163–193.
12.
HuirneR. B. M., and HardakerJ. B. (1998) ‘A multi-attribute model to optimise sow replacement decisions’, European Review of Agricultural Economics, Vol 25, pp 488–505.
13.
JiménezJ. F.BerbelJ., and TorricoM. (2001), ‘Análisis de la toma de decisiones de los agricultores ante cambios en el precio del agua. Modelo de decisión multicriterio’, Revista de Estudios Agro-Sociales y Pesqueros, Vol 190, pp 65–99.
14.
KeeneyR. L., and RaiffaH., eds (1976), Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade Offs, John Wiley & Sons, New York.
15.
RomeroC.AmadorF., and BarcoA. (1987), ‘Multiple objectives in agricultural planning: A compromise programming application’, American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Vol 69, No 1, pp 78–86.
16.
SumpsiJ. M.AmadorF., and RomeroC. (1996), ‘On farmers' objectives: A multi-criteria approach’, European Journal of Operational Research, Vol 96, pp 64–71.
