IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/jrpoli/v90y2024ics0301420724001405.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An integrated fuzzy-rough multi-criteria group decision-making model for quantitative assessment of geoheritage resources

Author

Listed:
  • Zorlu, Kuttusi
  • Polat, Selahattin
  • Yılmaz, Ali
  • Dede, Volkan

Abstract

The increase in the number of studies focusing on geoheritage, geoconservation, geoparks, and geotourism around the world has brought about the problem of revealing the value of geosites as a resource. Therefore, the quantitative values and usage patterns of geoheritage resources need to be determined. In this context, the current research uses fuzzy-rough MCGDM (multi-criteria group decision-making) methods to test approaches to assess the scientific, educational, touristic, and degradation risk potentials of geoheritage resources. For this purpose, the Brilha method was integrated with the fuzzy-rough MCGDM. The proposed approach was applied as a case study to four geosites selected from the Uşak province of Türkiye. In the two-stage analysis, the criteria set by the Brilha method were weighted with the IMF SWARA (Improved Fuzzy Stepwise Weight Assessment Ratio Analysis) technique, and the importance levels of the geosites were determined by the rough MARCOS (Measurement of Alternatives and Ranking according to Compromise Solution) technique according to the weighted criteria. According to the results, it has been determined that the importance of Ulubey Canyon, Taşyaran Valley, Hamamboğazı Thermal Springs, and Travertines as geoheritage resources are high and, accordingly, their risk of deterioration is high. The areas in question are currently extensively used for general tourism purposes. However, there are no local or national initiatives to recognise them as geoheritage resources and to ensure their sustainability by creating a conservation-use balance for these resources. The results are expected to provide practical and managerial implications to local stakeholders for developing a resource policy to promote the sustainable use of geoheritage resources. On the other hand, the proposed integrated methodological approach will also contribute theoretically to solving common problems in the geosite evaluation literature.

Suggested Citation

  • Zorlu, Kuttusi & Polat, Selahattin & Yılmaz, Ali & Dede, Volkan, 2024. "An integrated fuzzy-rough multi-criteria group decision-making model for quantitative assessment of geoheritage resources," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:jrpoli:v:90:y:2024:i:c:s0301420724001405
    DOI: 10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.104773
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301420724001405
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.resourpol.2024.104773?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. Željko Stević & Dragan Pamučar & Marko Subotić & Jurgita Antuchevičiene & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas, 2018. "The Location Selection for Roundabout Construction Using Rough BWM-Rough WASPAS Approach Based on a New Rough Hamy Aggregator," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-27, August.
    2. Ruban, Dmitry A. & Mikhailenko, Anna V. & Yashalova, Natalia N., 2022. "Valuable geoheritage resources: Potential versus exploitation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    3. Habibi, Tahereh & Ponedelnik, Alena A. & Yashalova, Natalia N. & Ruban, Dmitry A., 2018. "Urban geoheritage complexity: Evidence of a unique natural resource from Shiraz city in Iran," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 59(C), pages 85-94.
    4. Željko Stević & Nikola Brković, 2020. "A Novel Integrated FUCOM-MARCOS Model for Evaluation of Human Resources in a Transport Company," Logistics, MDPI, vol. 4(1), pages 1-14, February.
    5. Nicoletta Santangelo & Ettore Valente, 2020. "Geoheritage and Geotourism Resources," Resources, MDPI, vol. 9(7), pages 1-5, June.
    6. Nikolina Vojinović & Siniša Sremac & Dragan Zlatanović & Borna Abramović, 2021. "A Novel Integrated Fuzzy-Rough MCDM Model for Evaluation of Companies for Transport of Dangerous Goods," Complexity, Hindawi, vol. 2021, pages 1-16, December.
    7. Zorlu, Kuttusi & Dede, Volkan & Zorlu, Burçin Şeyda & Serin, Soner, 2023. "Quantitative assessment of geoheritage with the GAM and MEREC-based PROMETHEE-GAIA method," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 84(C).
    8. Sallam, Emad S. & Ruban, Dmitry A. & Ermolaev, Vladimir A., 2022. "Geoheritage resources and new direction of infrastructural growth in Egypt: From geosite assessment to policy development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    9. Abd El-Aal, Ahmed & Abdullah, Gamil M.S. & Al- Metwaly, Wael M. & AbdelMaksoud, Kholoud M., 2023. "Geological and archeological heritage resources assessment of the Najran Province; towards the 2030 vision of Saudi Arabia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    10. Erol, Ismail & Oztel, Ahmet & Searcy, Cory & Medeni, İ. Tolga, 2023. "Selecting the most suitable blockchain platform: A case study on the healthcare industry using a novel rough MCDM framework," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 186(PA).
    11. Cairncross, Bruce, 2011. "The National Heritage Resource Act (1999): Can legislation protect South Africa's rare geoheritage resources?," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(3), pages 204-213, September.
    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. Vittoria Vandelli & Lidia Selmi & Francesco Faccini & Andrea Ferrando & Paola Coratza, 2024. "Geoheritage Degradation Risk Assessment: Methodologies and Insights," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-20, November.
    2. Chen, Xiaohong & Yang, Shuhan & Hu, Dongbin & Li, Xihua, 2024. "Sustainable mining method selection by a multi-stakeholder collaborative multi-attribute group decision-making method," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 92(C).
    3. Mousa, Fatma A. & Ruban, Dmitry A. & Abu El-Hassan, Mohamed M. & Sallam, Emad S., 2024. "Late Mesozoic–Cenozoic geoheritage resources of the Kharga Oasis (Egypt): Novel assessment, exploitation perspectives, and policy implications," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(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. Mousa, Fatma A. & Ruban, Dmitry A. & Abu El-Hassan, Mohamed M. & Sallam, Emad S., 2024. "Late Mesozoic–Cenozoic geoheritage resources of the Kharga Oasis (Egypt): Novel assessment, exploitation perspectives, and policy implications," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    2. Abd El-Aal, Ahmed & Abdullah, Gamil M.S. & Al- Metwaly, Wael M. & AbdelMaksoud, Kholoud M., 2023. "Geological and archeological heritage resources assessment of the Najran Province; towards the 2030 vision of Saudi Arabia," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(PB).
    3. Sallam, Emad S. & Ruban, Dmitry A. & Ermolaev, Vladimir A., 2022. "Geoheritage resources and new direction of infrastructural growth in Egypt: From geosite assessment to policy development," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    4. Ruban, Dmitry A. & Mikhailenko, Anna V. & Yashalova, Natalia N., 2022. "Valuable geoheritage resources: Potential versus exploitation," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    5. Chia-Nan Wang & Ngoc-Ai-Thy Nguyen & Thanh-Tuan Dang, 2023. "Sustainable Evaluation of Major Third-Party Logistics Providers: A Framework of an MCDM-Based Entropy Objective Weighting Method," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-27, October.
    6. Ruban, Dmitry A., 2017. "Geodiversity as a precious national resource: A note on the role of geoparks," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 103-108.
    7. Ahmet Kaya & Dragan Pamucar & Hasan Emin Gürler & Mehmet Ozcalici, 2024. "Determining the financial performance of the firms in the Borsa Istanbul sustainability index: integrating multi criteria decision making methods with simulation," Financial Innovation, Springer;Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, vol. 10(1), pages 1-44, December.
    8. Phi-Hung Nguyen, 2023. "A Fully Completed Spherical Fuzzy Data-Driven Model for Analyzing Employee Satisfaction in Logistics Service Industry," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-34, May.
    9. Anna V. Mikhailenko & Dmitry A. Ruban, 2019. "Environment of Viewpoint Geosites: Evidence from the Western Caucasus," Land, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-10, June.
    10. Mu-Hsin Chang & James J. H. Liou & Huai-Wei Lo, 2019. "A Hybrid MCDM Model for Evaluating Strategic Alliance Partners in the Green Biopharmaceutical Industry," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(15), pages 1-20, July.
    11. Vladimir Simic & Ali Ebadi Torkayesh & Abtin Ijadi Maghsoodi, 2023. "Locating a disinfection facility for hazardous healthcare waste in the COVID-19 era: a novel approach based on Fermatean fuzzy ITARA-MARCOS and random forest recursive feature elimination algorithm," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 328(1), pages 1105-1150, September.
    12. Sudhanshu Joshi & Manu Sharma & Banu Y. Ekren & Yigit Kazancoglu & Sunil Luthra & Mukesh Prasad, 2023. "Assessing Supply Chain Innovations for Building Resilient Food Supply Chains: An Emerging Economy Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(6), pages 1-21, March.
    13. Sara Sampieri & Mohammed Bagader, 2024. "Sustainable Tourism Development in Jeddah: Protecting Cultural Heritage While Promoting Travel Destination," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(21), pages 1-24, October.
    14. Adis Puška & Željko Stević & Dragan Pamučar, 2022. "Evaluation and selection of healthcare waste incinerators using extended sustainability criteria and multi-criteria analysis methods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 11195-11225, September.
    15. Dragan Stanimirović & Vuk Bogdanović & Slavko Davidović & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Željko Stević, 2019. "The Influence of the Participation of Non-Resident Drivers on Roundabout Capacity," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-23, July.
    16. Tatyana K. Molchanova & Dmitry A. Ruban, 2019. "New Evidence of the Bangestan Geoheritage Resource in Iran: Beyond Hydrocarbon Reserves," Resources, MDPI, vol. 8(1), pages 1-12, February.
    17. Mi, Xiaomei & Tang, Ming & Liao, Huchang & Shen, Wenjing & Lev, Benjamin, 2019. "The state-of-the-art survey on integrations and applications of the best worst method in decision making: Why, what, what for and what's next?," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 87(C), pages 205-225.
    18. Wang, Mingsheng & Huang, Yong, 2024. "A digital Technology–Cultural resource strategy to drive innovation in cultural industries: A dynamic analysis based on machine learning," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 77(C).
    19. Faruk Görçün, Ömer. & Chatterjee, Prasenjit. & Stević, Željko. & Küçükönder, Hande., 2024. "An integrated model for road freight transport firm selection in third-party logistics using T-spherical Fuzzy sets," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 186(C).
    20. Lucie Kubalikova & Karel Kirchner & Frantisek Kuda & Ivo Machar, 2019. "The Role of Anthropogenic Landforms in Sustainable Landscape Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(16), pages 1-16, August.

    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:jrpoli:v:90:y:2024:i:c:s0301420724001405. 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: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/inca/30467 .

    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.