The aim of this study was to examine the sustainability performance of organic and low-input conventional farms with the sustainability assessment tool—RISE 3.0. It is an indicator-based method for holistic assessment of sustainability of agricultural production at farm level. Ten organic and 10 conventional farms from eastern Poland, Lublin province were assessed. According to the thresholds levels of the RISE method, organic farms performed positively for 7 out of 10 themes, while the values of the other 3 topics, biodiversity, working conditions, and economic viability, were at medium level. Conventional farms reached positive scores for 9 out of 10 themes. The only middle-performing theme was biodiversity. None of the two farm types had the lowest, problematic scores for examined themes. For the theme biodiversity and two indicators (greenhouse gas balance and intensity of agricultural production), significant differences between farming systems were found. Biodiversity performance, an important indicator of sustainability, estimated with the RISE system, was highly correlated with measured on-field weed flora and Orthoptera biodiversity of farms. High soil acidity and low crop productivity, improper weed regulation, and energy management were the most common problems in both types of farms. Working hours and wage and income levels were also assessed as being low. Recommendations to improve the sustainability of both organic and conventional farms are presented.

Trois methodes developpees en Suisse sont disponibles pour evaluer la durabilite au niveau de l’exploitation: RISE, SMART et SALCAsustain. Le present article compare les trois methodes a l’aide d’un catalogue de criteres et de quelques exemples concrets afin d’aider le lecteur a choisir l’outil le mieux adapte a son application specifique et a son groupe cible. Les trois methodes couvrent toutes les dimensions de la durabilite et les resultats obtenus permettent de deduire des mesures d’amelioration et des decisions concretes pour les groupes d’interet concernes. Les arguments exposes montrent que SALCAsustain convient pour repondre a des questions de recherche et analyser differentes strategies de gestion d’exploitation. La force de RISE reside dans sa souplesse, qui permet de l’utiliser pour le conseil, l’enseignement et la comparaison d’exploitations et de groupes d’exploitations. SMART permet un examen rapide de la durabilite a l’echelle de l’exploitation et fournit des resultats qui peuvent egalement etre compares entre les exploitations et facilement communiques a des tiers. Le choix de la methode appropriee depend donc de la problematique en jeu et du groupe cible.

There are three methods available for evaluating sustainability at farm level that were developed in Switzerland: RISE, SMART and SALCAsustain. In this article, the three methods are compared by means of a list of criteria and several concrete examples with the aim of making it easier for readers to decide which tool is best suited for their own specific application and target group. All three methods cover sustainability comprehensively, and concrete measures for improvement and decision-making can be derived for the relevant interest groups from the results. The details show that SALCAsustain is suitable for answering research queries as well as analysing different farm-management strategies. RISE's strength is its flexible applicability which allows for its use in extension and teaching, and in the comparison of farms and groups of farms. SMART enables rapid screening of farm sustainability and provides results which also allow for inter-farm comparisons and which can easily be communicated to third parties. The choice of the appropriate method therefore depends on the question posed as well as on the target group.

Dairy farming is a key sector for Swiss agriculture and the food industry. Therefore, sustainability of dairy farms is important. Grassland-based farming systems are the most common production system, combining the indoor feeding of fresh grass with partial grazing. The effects of three dairy production systems (VW: full grazing plus on avg. 46±93 SD kg concentrate (KF), GFKF: indoor feeding/partial grazing plus on avg. 345±204 SD kg KF and GFKFplus: indoor feeding/partial grazing plus on avg. 1007±353 SD kg KF) on sustainability, according to RISE, were studied on 12 pilot farms in the lowland of Switzerland. In most of the sustainability themes, the farms performed medium to good according to the RISE evaluation scale. The GFKFplus farms produced the highest output of milk by low N- and P-self-sufficiency, showed the highest energy input and the lowest greenhouse gas output per kg milk. The GFKF group achieved remarkable results by moderate N-, P- and energy inputs. The VW farms showed a lower milk output but a higher level of feed self-sufficiency and a lower energy consumption. In the search for the optimal production strategy, farms should consider the individual farm structure (contiguous areas), the market potential but also social aspects such as the preferences of the farmer`s family.