IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ags/agreko/54720.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimisation of different land use regimes in the Mhala district

Author

Listed:
  • Balyamujura, H.N.
  • van Schalkwyk, Herman D.

Abstract

Communal, commercial and nature conservation land use alternatives occur together at the perimeter of Manyeleti Game Reserve in Mhala district. The different land use alternatives were compared with one another with the purpose of determining the best possible land use. Communal households and the Seville scheme households perform poorly in support of household welfare. This holds disastrous implications for future generations if nothing is done. The Uthla scheme households perform better and generate larger incomes, but at the expense of communal households. Both schemes are highly subsidised by government. Manyeleti Game Reserve is mismanaged and the worst land use alternative in the area, providing no benefit to people living at its perimeter and needs government support for its continued survival. Using multi criteria analysis a combination of communal and conservation land use alternatives is found to be the best alternative, maximising the communities' welfare and conserving the environment.

Suggested Citation

  • Balyamujura, H.N. & van Schalkwyk, Herman D., 1997. "Optimisation of different land use regimes in the Mhala district," Agrekon, Agricultural Economics Association of South Africa (AEASA), vol. 36(4), pages 1-12, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:54720
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.54720
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/54720/files/20_balya%20-%20december%201997.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.54720?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Rietveld, P., 1982. "Using ordinal information in decision-making under uncertainty," Serie Research Memoranda 0012, VU University Amsterdam, Faculty of Economics, Business Administration and Econometrics.
    2. van Huylenbroeck, G., 1995. "The conflict analysis method: bridging the gap between ELECTRE, PROMETHEE and ORESTE," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 490-502, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhang, Jingshun & Hu, Jiayi & Wang, Xitong & Fang, Lien & Jin, Yi & Li, Muyang & Liu, Yangqing & Wu, Anna & Wang, Libin & Liu, Ruining & Zhang, Yi & Chen, Faan, 2023. "Quantifying transport safety success at the regional level: A guide to policy and practice on investment for G20," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 89(C).
    2. Elvio MATTIOLI, 2003. "The measurement of coherence in the evaluation of criteria and its effects or ranking problems illustrated using a multicriteria decision method," Working Papers 199, Universita' Politecnica delle Marche (I), Dipartimento di Scienze Economiche e Sociali.
    3. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 2000. "Multicriteria analysis for agricultural resource management: A critical survey and future perspectives," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(2), pages 486-500, April.
    4. Domingos Cardoso & Jorge Sousa, 2005. "A Multi-Attribute Ranking Solutions Confirmation Procedure," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 138(1), pages 127-141, September.
    5. Govindan, Kannan & Jepsen, Martin Brandt, 2016. "ELECTRE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 250(1), pages 1-29.
    6. Hayashi, Kiyotada, 1998. "Multicriteria aid for agricultural decisions using preference relations: methodology and application," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 483-503, December.
    7. Piet Rietveld, 1983. "Analysis of Conflicts and Compromises, Using Qualitative Data," Conflict Management and Peace Science, Peace Science Society (International), vol. 7(1), pages 39-64, February.
    8. Wang, Ying-Ming & Yang, Jian-Bo & Xu, Dong-Ling, 2006. "Environmental impact assessment using the evidential reasoning approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1885-1913, November.
    9. Behzadian, Majid & Kazemzadeh, R.B. & Albadvi, A. & Aghdasi, M., 2010. "PROMETHEE: A comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 200(1), pages 198-215, January.
    10. Chen, Faan & Li, Yaxin & Feng, Qianqian & Dong, Zehao & Qian, Yiming & Yan, Yi & Ho, Mun S. & Ma, Qianchen & Zhang, Dashan & Jin, Yuanzhe, 2023. "Road safety performance rating through PSI-PRIDIT: A planning tool for designing policies and identifying best practices for EAS countries," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 85(C).
    11. Nillesen, Eleonora & Wesseler, Justus & Cook, Averil, 2003. "Correcting for multiple destination trips in recreational use values using a mean-value approach; An application to Bellenden Ker National Park, Australia," Mansholt Working Papers 46733, Wageningen University, Mansholt Graduate School of Social Sciences.
    12. Stanislav Edward Shmelev (ODID), "undated". "Multi-criteria Assessment of Ecosystems and Biodiversity: New Dimensions and Stakeholders in the South of France," QEH Working Papers qehwps181, Queen Elizabeth House, University of Oxford.
    13. Kim, Deok-Hwan & Kim, Kwang-Jae & Sam Park, K., 2010. "Compromising prioritization from pairwise comparisons considering type I and II errors," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 204(2), pages 285-293, July.
    14. Giuseppe Munda, 2004. "Métodos y procesos multicriterio para la evaluación social de las políticas públicas," Revista Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, Red Iberoamericana de Economía Ecológica, vol. 1, pages 31-45.
    15. Mustafa, A. & Goh, M., 1996. "Multi-criterion models for higher education administration," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 24(2), pages 167-178, April.
    16. Prof. Dr. Sangita Bharuka & Nancy Shrivastava, 2020. "Review of Waste Management Models and Their Application," Journal of Commerce and Trade, Society for Advanced Management Studies, vol. 15(1), pages 38-48, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Land Economics/Use;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:agreko:54720. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeasaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.