IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecoser/v17y2016icp142-151.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to identify dryland ecosystem service trade-offs under different rangeland land uses

Author

Listed:
  • Favretto, N.
  • Stringer, L.C.
  • Dougill, A.J.
  • Dallimer, M.
  • Perkins, J.S.
  • Reed, M.S.
  • Atlhopheng, J.R.
  • Mulale, K.

Abstract

Land degradation undermines ecosystem service provision, limiting economic returns from semi-arid rangelands. We apply a Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) to assess the value of ecosystem services, using monetary and non-monetary techniques in semi-arid rangelands in Kgalagadi District, southern Botswana. In doing so, we provide an empirical understanding of the linkages between policy, land use and the provision of ecosystem services based on the perspectives of local stakeholders identified through interviews and a workshop consultation. Findings suggest communal grazing provides the widest range of monetary and non-monetary values linked to ecosystem service delivery. Current economic incentives and policy initiatives supporting the livestock sector, linked to fencing and borehole drilling, create perverse incentives that over-emphasise commercial food production at the expense of other services. We identify a need for policy reforms to support livelihood diversification through the provision of a wider range of ecosystem services, and for further research to explore market opportunities for veld products and carbon trading. We show that MCDA offers a useful holistic assessment framework that could be applied more widely to semi-arid rangelands globally.

Suggested Citation

  • Favretto, N. & Stringer, L.C. & Dougill, A.J. & Dallimer, M. & Perkins, J.S. & Reed, M.S. & Atlhopheng, J.R. & Mulale, K., 2016. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis to identify dryland ecosystem service trade-offs under different rangeland land uses," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 17(C), pages 142-151.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecoser:v:17:y:2016:i:c:p:142-151
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.12.005
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041615300693
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecoser.2015.12.005?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefan Hajkowicz & Geoff McDonald & Phil Smith, 2000. "An Evaluation of Multiple Objective Decision Support Weighting Techniques in Natural Resource Management," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 43(4), pages 505-518.
    2. Fontana, Veronika & Radtke, Anna & Bossi Fedrigotti, Valérie & Tappeiner, Ulrike & Tasser, Erich & Zerbe, Stefan & Buchholz, Thomas, 2013. "Comparing land-use alternatives: Using the ecosystem services concept to define a multi-criteria decision analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 93(C), pages 128-136.
    3. Henk Broekhuizen & Catharina Groothuis-Oudshoorn & Janine Til & J. Hummel & Maarten IJzerman, 2015. "A Review and Classification of Approaches for Dealing with Uncertainty in Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for Healthcare Decisions," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 33(5), pages 445-455, May.
    4. RogerS, Martin & Bruen, Michael, 1998. "A new system for weighting environmental criteria for use within ELECTRE III," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 107(3), pages 552-563, June.
    5. F. Hutton Barron & Bruce E. Barrett, 1996. "Decision Quality Using Ranked Attribute Weights," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 42(11), pages 1515-1523, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Aynur Mamat & Jianping Wang & Yuanxu Ma, 2020. "Impacts of Land-Use Change on Ecosystem Service Value of Mountain–Oasis–Desert Ecosystem: A Case Study of Kaidu–Kongque River Basin, Northwest China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(1), pages 1-16, December.
    2. Grima, Nelson & Singh, Simron J. & Smetschka, Barbara, 2018. "Improving payments for ecosystem services (PES) outcomes through the use of Multi-Criteria Evaluation (MCE) and the software OPTamos," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 47-55.
    3. Stafford, William & Birch, Catherine & Etter, Hannes & Blanchard, Ryan & Mudavanhu, Shepherd & Angelstam, Per & Blignaut, James & Ferreira, Louwrens & Marais, Christo, 2017. "The economics of landscape restoration: Benefits of controlling bush encroachment and invasive plant species in South Africa and Namibia," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 27(PB), pages 193-202.
    4. Caroline King-Okumu, 2018. "Valuing Environmental Benefit Streams in the Dryland Ecosystems of Sub-Saharan Africa," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(4), pages 1-23, November.
    5. Martin, D.M. & Mazzotta, M., 2018. "Non-monetary valuation using Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis: Sensitivity of additive aggregation methods to scaling and compensation assumptions," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 29(PA), pages 13-22.
    6. Kumar, Suresh & Madhu, M & Singh, Ranjay K & Kaushal, Rajesh & Jyotiprava Dash, Ch. & Gowda, Hombe H.C. & Barla, GW, 2024. "Changes in the value of ecosystem services due to watershed development in India’s Eastern Ghats and incentives for better stewardship," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 65(C).
    7. Thomas Campagnaro & Giovanni Trentanovi & Tommaso Sitzia, 2018. "Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    8. Bennett, James & Marandure, Tawanda & Hawkins, Heidi-Jayne & Mapiye, Cletos & Palmer, Anthony & Lemke, Stefanie & Wu, Lianhai & Moradzadeh, Mostafa, 2023. "A conceptual framework for understanding ecosystem trade-offs and synergies, in communal rangeland systems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 61(C).
    9. Schild, Johanna E.M. & Vermaat, Jan E. & de Groot, Rudolf S. & Quatrini, Simone & van Bodegom, Peter M., 2018. "A global meta-analysis on the monetary valuation of dryland ecosystem services: The role of socio-economic, environmental and methodological indicators," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 32(PA), pages 78-89.
    10. Rodrigue Vivien Cao Diogo & Luc Hippolyte Dossa & Sèyi Fridaïus Ulrich Vanvanhossou & Badirou Dine Abdoulaye & Kossi Hélliot Dosseh & Marcel Houinato & Eva Schlecht & Andreas Buerkert, 2021. "Farmers’ and Herders’ Perceptions on Rangeland Management in Two Agroecological Zones of Benin," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-17, April.
    11. Mustajoki, Jyri & Saarikoski, Heli & Belton, Valerie & Hjerppe, Turo & Marttunen, Mika, 2020. "Utilizing ecosystem service classifications in multi-criteria decision analysis – Experiences of peat extraction case in Finland," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 41(C).
    12. Chilombo, Andrew & Van Der Horst, Dan, 2021. "Livelihoods and coping strategies of local communities on previous customary land in limbo of commercial agricultural development: Lessons from the farm block program in Zambia," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 104(C).

    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. Tervonen, Tommi & Figueira, José Rui & Lahdelma, Risto & Dias, Juscelino Almeida & Salminen, Pekka, 2009. "A stochastic method for robustness analysis in sorting problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(1), pages 236-242, January.
    2. Che khairil Izam Che Ibrahim & Seosamh B. Costello & Suzanne Wilkinson, 2013. "Development of a conceptual team integration performance index for alliance projects," Construction Management and Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 31(11), pages 1128-1143, November.
    3. Joshua Sohn & Pierre Bisquert & Patrice Buche & Abdelraouf Hecham & Pradip P. Kalbar & Ben Goldstein & Morten Birkved & Stig Irving Olsen, 2020. "Argumentation Corrected Context Weighting-Life Cycle Assessment: A Practical Method of Including Stakeholder Perspectives in Multi-Criteria Decision Support for LCA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(6), pages 1-23, March.
    4. Mateos, A. & Jimenez, A. & Rios-Insua, S., 2006. "Monte Carlo simulation techniques for group decision making with incomplete information," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 174(3), pages 1842-1864, November.
    5. Risto Lahdelma & Pekka Salminen, 2001. "SMAA-2: Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis for Group Decision Making," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 49(3), pages 444-454, June.
    6. Hajkowicz, Stefan & Higgins, Andrew, 2008. "A comparison of multiple criteria analysis techniques for water resource management," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 184(1), pages 255-265, January.
    7. Dorota Górecka, 2012. "Applying Multi-Criteria Decision Aiding techniques in the process of project management within the wedding planning business," Operations Research and Decisions, Wroclaw University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Management, vol. 22(4), pages 41-67.
    8. Amir Noori & Hossein Bonakdari & Khosro Morovati & Bahram Gharabaghi, 2018. "The optimal dam site selection using a group decision-making method through fuzzy TOPSIS model," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 38(4), pages 471-488, December.
    9. Thomas Campagnaro & Giovanni Trentanovi & Tommaso Sitzia, 2018. "Identifying Habitat Type Conservation Priorities under the Habitats Directive: Application to Two Italian Biogeographical Regions," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(4), pages 1-20, April.
    10. Podinovski, Vladislav V., 2020. "Maximum likelihood solutions for multicriterial choice problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 286(1), pages 299-308.
    11. Paul L. Goethals & Natalie M. Scala, 2018. "Eliminating the Weakest Link Approach to Army Unit Readiness," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 15(2), pages 110-130, June.
    12. Beynon, Malcolm J., 2005. "A novel technique of object ranking and classification under ignorance: An application to the corporate failure risk problem," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 167(2), pages 493-517, December.
    13. Ezbakhe, Fatine & Pérez-Foguet, Agustí, 2021. "Decision analysis for sustainable development: The case of renewable energy planning under uncertainty," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 601-613.
    14. Beynon, Malcolm J. & Wells, Peter, 2008. "The lean improvement of the chemical emissions of motor vehicles based on preference ranking: A PROMETHEE uncertainty analysis," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 384-394, June.
    15. Stephen P. Chambal & Jeffery D. Weir & Yucel R. Kahraman & Alex J. Gutman, 2011. "A Practical Procedure for Customizable One-Way Sensitivity Analysis in Additive Value Models," Decision Analysis, INFORMS, vol. 8(4), pages 303-321, December.
    16. Kadi Padur & Anna-Helena Purre, 2022. "Optimizing post-mining land-use decision making in cooperation with stakeholders," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 4875-4900, April.
    17. 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.
    18. Sheng Tun Li & Thuong Thi Pham & Hui Chi Chuang & Zhi-Wei Wang, 2016. "Does reliable information matter? Towards a trustworthy co-created recommendation model by mining unboxing reviews," Information Systems and e-Business Management, Springer, vol. 14(1), pages 71-99, February.
    19. Tran, Dung Duc & van Halsema, Gerardo & Hellegers, Petra J.G.J. & Ludwig, Fulco & Seijger, Chris, 2018. "Stakeholders’ assessment of dike-protected and flood-based alternatives from a sustainable livelihood perspective in An Giang Province, Mekong Delta, Vietnam," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 206(C), pages 187-199.
    20. Nzotcha, Urbain & Kenfack, Joseph & Blanche Manjia, Marceline, 2019. "Integrated multi-criteria decision making methodology for pumped hydro-energy storage plant site selection from a sustainable development perspective with an application," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 930-947.

    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:eee:ecoser:v:17:y:2016:i:c:p:142-151. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/ecosystem-services .

    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.