# Presentation: 655581

## Natural Resources Sustainability Framework  for Regional Analysis

- By **David Buland** & **Lee Norfleet**
**NRCS Institute Staff**

- Measuring the Sustainability of Agricultural Systems at the County/MLRA Level

**Economic Indicators**

**Sustainability Indicators**

**1972 to 1995 Yield Trends**
- Yield Trends from 23 years of NASS data

- We used the model developed by Gomez**1** to analyze the sustainability of agricultural systems based on their ability to meet both the needs of the farmers, and conserve natural resources. Twenty-nine counties in **MLRA 105** were examined, each with over 60% of their area within MLRA 105.  These counties were compared to the rest of the MLRA by Farmer Satisfaction, Resource Conservation, and a combination of both sets of indicators.  The ratio of each county’s value to the MLRA average is the index score for that indicator. ‘Bad’ values were inverted, so that the higher index is better for all factors.  Threshold values were set at either a minimal acceptable level, or at the MLRA average.
- Eighteen **indicators** were selected from the Natural Resources Inventory (NRI), Agricultural Census, National Agricultural Statistical Service (NASS) Crop Production Statistics, and the Conservation Tillage Information Center (CTIC) Tillage Survey. The spreadsheet below has the index values for each county indicator and the averages of the indicators.
- In the **first set of 19 indicators**, only one county passed all eight economic tests (Wabasha, MN), and no county passed all 11 resource conservation texts (Wabasha passed 10 of 11, but was 1% over on the total erosion index). Jackson Co., Iowa has the poorest economic score and the second poorest environmental score. Using the **average index values****,** 14 counties pass the economics test, and 18 resource conservation.  Extremely low levels of non-cropland erosion in some counties over-balanced the other indicators in this procedure.
- The next step is to **drop the poorer indicators**. The new set of 13 measures produces better results.  With the smaller test, Wabasha is the only county to pass all tests. Using the **average of the indexes**, 12 counties pass the overall average economic test, and 22 counties pass the resource conservation test.  Seven counties pass both of the tests.
- Combining social/economic data with natural resource data is a **useful tool** for conservation planning at state and regional levels. These indicators can be easily reproduced for other MLRAs.  All indicators come from national datasets, already available in INFORMAX or MS ACCESS databases.  This analysis used only MS Office and any simple mapmaking tool.  This analysis can be replicated at any state or regional office with existing equipment and skills. Testing for the entire Mid-West region shows promise.  This can be a useful tool for management to use for workload analysis and progress reporting.
- (**1** “Measuring the Sustainability of Agricultural Systems at the Farm Level”; Dr. Arturo A. Gomez, David E. Swete Kelly, and Dr. J Keith Syers, _Workshop on Advances in Soil Quality for Land Management_; Ballarat, Australia, & _Methods for Assessing Soil Quality_, SSSA Sp.Pub#49, 1996.)

-  This graph shows the calculation of cultivated cropland erosion, plus the margins of error. The happy face shows where the average erosion rate would be if one outlying PSU was excluded from the analysis.  Each data set has its own unique problems. The NRI is not reliable at the county level, just at the MLRA/State level.  Early CTIC surveys are based primarily on expert opinion and windshield surveys.  The Ag. Census is based solely on the operator's statements and missed 400,000 farms in 1992.  The NASS production survey is statically reliable at the county level, but is subject to later revisions. Other NASS surveys are normally not published at a county level.
- .

- The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not prohibited bases apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at 202-720-2600 (voice and TDD).   To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

- Radar graphs are a quick method of **pinpointing items of concern** for each county.  The broad green line shows the sustainability goals for each item.  Most goals are set at 100% of the MLRA average, so the goals appear as almost a circle.  The connected points show the index for that county for each indicator.
- Jackson County, Iowa shows poorly on both economic and conservation goals. With its southern climate, it started with higher yields, but saw little  increased yields or land values. **Net returns per acre were low** and 19% of farms had net losses. The low Resource Conservation scores are due to high cropland and non-cropland erosion. High levels of conservation are applied (based on number of practices applied on NRI points and conservation tillage), but not enough to slow their erosion rates to the average. With the high level of conservation tillage, additional emphasis on no-till or ridge-till practices may be effective in the county from both cultural and conservation perspectives. Emphasis on grazing practices should also be included.  A case can be made to pinpoint more NRCS resources into this county to cost-effectively meet regional conservation goals.
- Note how Wabasha County’s graph is **distorted** by the large 425% index value for %Other Land (non-cropland) eroding over T.  The imbalance in the NRI data for this variable was one factor in dropping it in later analysis.   Note, Wabasha does not quite qualify on Farm Tenure (96%)(low average years on farm) and Total Erosion (99%(actually 101% of the MLRA USLE average since it is a negative indicator)).  With existing conservation measures, it has average cropland and non-cropland erosion per acre, but its high percentage of cropland pushes the total erosion per acre above average.  Both measures were dropped in the second cut.  Wabasha has greater levels of conservation tillage and applied conservation practices than average, and those practices are doing the job.

- _WARNING!!! Be Careful to avoid using data beyond its reliability._

**%Cropland Eroding > T**
- Calculated from each 1992 NRI point.

**Economic / Conservation Correlation?**
- All four tested sets of indicators showed slight positive correlation between Economic and Sustainability Indexes. Most counties exceeding the threshold for Resource Conservation also have high economic values. Jackson County has both the poorest economic and conservation indexes.

**Summary**

**Sustainability Index Values for Counties in MLRA 105**

**Radar Graphs**