A comparative analysis of three multi-criteria decision-making methods for land suitability assessment

被引:5
作者
Rashidi, Farahnaz [1 ]
Sharifian, Shadi [2 ]
机构
[1] Agr Res Educ & Extens Org AREEO, Res Inst Forests & Rangelands, Tehran, Iran
[2] Univ Payam Noor PNU, Tehran, Iran
关键词
Afforestation; AHP; Fuzzy AHP; Buckley method; Multi-criteria decision-making; Siahpoosh Watershed; TOPSIS;
D O I
10.1007/s10661-022-10259-6
中图分类号
X [环境科学、安全科学];
学科分类号
08 ; 0830 ;
摘要
Natural resource management relies on identifying the ecological constraints, assessing land suitability, and considering the socio-economic demands in the region. However, in many developing countries, natural resources are extensively over-used in favor of economic growth. This is due to the fact that conservation and natural constraints are not always taken into consideration during the planning phase, especially when the decision-making process is mainly influenced by political or economical views. To avoid these subjective plannings, environmental planners are encouraged to consider quantitative planning approaches that can integrate environmental, social, economic, and political matters through a non-bias procedure. The present study, therefore, examines the application of three multi-criteria decision-making methods (MCDM), namely, analytic hierarchical process (AHP), fuzzy analytic hierarchical process (fuzzy AHP), and technique for order of preference by similarity to ideal solution (TOPSIS), for the assessment of land suitability afforestation. Siahpoosh Watershed, in Iran, is used as a case study to compare three MCDM methods. To achieve this, a set of land suitability criteria (i.e., slope, elevation, aspect, soil texture, soil depth, drainage, erosion, temperature, rainfall, and vegetation type and cover) was defined and weighted using the AHP and fuzzy AHP methods. TOPSIS was then used to prioritize and rank the suitability of different sections of the study area for afforestation. The study demonstrates that the fuzzy AHP method combined with TOPSIS generates more reliable outcomes than the AHP method. The results could be useful for making more informed decisions about afforestation in the region.
引用
收藏
页数:15
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] Stochastic multi-criteria decision-making: an overview to methods and applications
    Celik, Erkan
    Gul, Muhammet
    Yucesan, Melih
    Mete, Suleyman
    [J]. BENI-SUEF UNIVERSITY JOURNAL OF BASIC AND APPLIED SCIENCES, 2019, 8 (01)
  • [32] Group Decision-Making Using Improved Multi-Criteria Decision Making Methods for Credit Risk Analysis
    Wu, Wenshuai
    Kou, Gang
    Peng, Yi
    [J]. FILOMAT, 2016, 30 (15) : 4135 - 4150
  • [33] A review of multi-criteria decision-making methods for infrastructure management
    Kabir, Golam
    Sadiq, Rehan
    Tesfamariam, Solomon
    [J]. STRUCTURE AND INFRASTRUCTURE ENGINEERING, 2014, 10 (09) : 1176 - 1210
  • [34] A Comparison of the Multi-criteria Decision-Making Methods for the Selection of Researchers
    Kaya, Gulsum Kubra
    Ozturk, Fatih
    [J]. INDUSTRIAL ENGINEERING IN THE INTERNET-OF-THINGS WORLD, GJCIE 2020, 2022, : 147 - 159
  • [35] Comparison of multi-criteria decision-making methods for equipment selection
    Richard Edgar Hodgett
    [J]. The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, 2016, 85 : 1145 - 1157
  • [36] APPLICATION OF MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION-MAKING METHODS IN DESTINATION BENCHMARKING
    Lusticky, Martin
    Vachova, Lucie
    Kaderabkova, Jaroslava
    [J]. 15TH INTERNATIONAL COLLOQUIUM ON REGIONAL SCIENCES, 2012, : 379 - 387
  • [37] Multi-criteria decision-making methods: application in humanitarian operations
    Nain, Aniruddh
    Jain, Deepika
    Trivedi, Ashish
    [J]. BENCHMARKING-AN INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL, 2024, 31 (06) : 2090 - 2128
  • [38] Drone selection using multi-criteria decision-making methods
    Khan, Muhammad Sohaib
    Shah, Syed Irtiza Ali
    Javed, Ali
    Qadri, Nafees Mumtaz
    Hussain, Nadeem
    [J]. PROCEEDINGS OF 2021 INTERNATIONAL BHURBAN CONFERENCE ON APPLIED SCIENCES AND TECHNOLOGIES (IBCAST), 2021, : 256 - 270
  • [39] A Comparative Study on Multi-Criteria Decision-Making in Dressing Process for Internal Grinding
    Huu-Quang Nguyen
    Xuan-Hung Le
    Thanh-Tu Nguyen
    Quoc-Hoang Tran
    Ngoc-Pi Vu
    [J]. MACHINES, 2022, 10 (05)
  • [40] Multi-criteria decision-making for sustainable metropolitan cities assessment
    Carli, Raffaele
    Dotoli, Mariagrazia
    Pellegrino, Roberta
    [J]. JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT, 2018, 226 : 46 - 61