IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v24y2022i4d10.1007_s10668-021-01638-z.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Optimizing post-mining land-use decision making in cooperation with stakeholders

Author

Listed:
  • Kadi Padur

    (Tallinn University)

  • Anna-Helena Purre

    (Tallinn University)

Abstract

There are several possibilities for rehabilitating quarries after mineral resource excavation. In Estonia, creating forest, water body, meadow, arable land or recreational area are main reuse alternatives to rehabilitate sand, gravel, clay, limestone, dolomite and oil shale quarries. Rehabilitation decisions are currently being made inconsistently based on different limited arguments and without the involvement of stakeholders. To choose the optimal alternative for each site, legislative, environmental and socio-economic criteria should be considered in a systematic way. The main aim of the paper is to create a decision model containing decision tree with restrictive criteria and decision-matrix with comparison criteria, and test it to choose the optimal reuse alternatives for three quarries in Estonia. This increases the transparency of such decisions and creates a tool for choosing optimal reuse alternative for mineral resource quarries. Decision tree was created in cooperation with experts based on environmental and legislative criteria. To find out the comparison criteria and their weights, 93 stakeholders such as landowner, local communities, experts from governmental agencies, environmental NGOs, universities, environmental management and excavation companies were engaged via survey. The decision model succeeded to find optimal reuse alternative for three tested quarries, and application of this decision model supports the sustainable land-use and development. With some country-specific or legislation-based modifications, the model can be applied also in other countries. The model is easily usable and will fasten making sustainable decisions of the reuse of quarry areas and give clear arguments in the communication with the stakeholders.

Suggested Citation

  • 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.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01638-z
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-021-01638-z
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-021-01638-z
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-021-01638-z?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. Sapfo Τsolaki-Fiaka & George D. Bathrellos & Hariklia D. Skilodimou, 2018. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis for an Abandoned Quarry in the Evros Region (NE Greece)," Land, MDPI, vol. 7(2), pages 1-16, April.
    2. Sánchez-Lozano, Juan M. & Teruel-Solano, Jerónimo & Soto-Elvira, Pedro L. & Socorro García-Cascales, M., 2013. "Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and Multi-Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) methods for the evaluation of solar farms locations: Case study in south-eastern Spain," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 544-556.
    3. van Zanten, Boris T. & Verburg, Peter H. & Scholte, S.S.K. & Tieskens, K.F., 2016. "Using choice modeling to map aesthetic values at a landscape scale: Lessons from a Dutch case study," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C), pages 221-231.
    4. 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.
    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. Ronyastra, I Made & Saw, Lip Huat & Low, Foon Siang, 2023. "A review of methods for integrating risk management and multicriteria decision analysis in financial feasibility for post-coal-mining land usage selection," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(PB).

    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. Mardani, Abbas & Zavadskas, Edmundas Kazimieras & Khalifah, Zainab & Zakuan, Norhayati & Jusoh, Ahmad & Nor, Khalil Md & Khoshnoudi, Masoumeh, 2017. "A review of multi-criteria decision-making applications to solve energy management problems: Two decades from 1995 to 2015," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 216-256.
    2. Tasser, Erich & Schirpke, Uta & Zoderer, Brenda Maria & Tappeiner, Ulrike, 2020. "Towards an integrative assessment of land-use type values from the perspective of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 42(C).
    3. Guido C. Guerrero-Liquet & Santiago Oviedo-Casado & J. M. Sánchez-Lozano & M. Socorro García-Cascales & Javier Prior & Antonio Urbina, 2018. "Determination of the Optimal Size of Photovoltaic Systems by Using Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-18, December.
    4. Finn, Thomas & McKenzie, Paul, 2020. "A high-resolution suitability index for solar farm location in complex landscapes," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 158(C), pages 520-533.
    5. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Nilson, Roberta S. & Katkar, Venktesh V. & Stedman, Richard C. & Kay, David L. & Ifft, Jennifer E. & Zhang, K. Max, 2021. "Integrating social considerations in multicriteria decision analysis for utility-scale solar photovoltaic siting," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 288(C).
    6. 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.
    7. Villacreses, Geovanna & Gaona, Gabriel & Martínez-Gómez, Javier & Jijón, Diego Juan, 2017. "Wind farms suitability location using geographical information system (GIS), based on multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) methods: The case of continental Ecuador," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 275-286.
    8. Arturo Sanchez-Porras & María Guadalupe Tenorio-Arvide & Ricardo Darío Peña-Moreno & María Laura Sampedro-Rosas & Sonia Emilia Silva-Gómez, 2018. "Evaluation of the Potential Change to the Ecosystem Service Provision Due to Industrialization," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(9), pages 1-20, September.
    9. Mariano Gallo, 2019. "An Optimisation Model to Consider the NIMBY Syndrome within the Landfill Siting Problem," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-18, July.
    10. Noorollahi, Younes & Ghenaatpisheh Senani, Ali & Fadaei, Ahmad & Simaee, Mobina & Moltames, Rahim, 2022. "A framework for GIS-based site selection and technical potential evaluation of PV solar farm using Fuzzy-Boolean logic and AHP multi-criteria decision-making approach," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 186(C), pages 89-104.
    11. Esther Reith & Elizabeth Gosling & Thomas Knoke & Carola Paul, 2020. "How Much Agroforestry Is Needed to Achieve Multifunctional Landscapes at the Forest Frontier?—Coupling Expert Opinion with Robust Goal Programming," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-27, July.
    12. Jane Musole Kwenye & Xiaoting Hou Jones & Alan Renwick, 2023. "Understanding Land-Use Trade-off Decision Making Using the Analytical Hierarchy Process: Insights from Agricultural Land Managers in Zambia," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-19, February.
    13. Amalia Vaneska Palacio Buendía & Yolanda Pérez-Albert & David Serrano Giné, 2021. "Mapping Landscape Perception: An Assessment with Public Participation Geographic Information Systems and Spatial Analysis Techniques," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Sánchez-Lozano, J.M. & García-Cascales, M.S. & Lamata, M.T., 2014. "Identification and selection of potential sites for onshore wind farms development in Region of Murcia, Spain," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 311-324.
    15. Ceren Erdin & Halil Emre Akbaş, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for the Location Selection of Shopping Malls: A Case Study from Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    16. Sward, Jeffrey A. & Siff, Jackson & Gu, Jiajun & Zhang, K. Max, 2019. "Strategic planning for utility-scale solar photovoltaic development – Historical peak events revisited," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 250(C), pages 1292-1301.
    17. Cho, Sangmin & Kim, Jinsoo & Heo, Eunnyeong, 2015. "Application of fuzzy analytic hierarchy process to select the optimal heating facility for Korean horticulture and stockbreeding sectors," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 49(C), pages 1075-1083.
    18. Diego Sebastián Tello & Jorge Dante Prada & Estela Raquel Cristeche, 2021. "A multi-criteria assessment for native forest policy analysis: the case of Caldén forest in the province of Córdoba, Argentina," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(4), pages 5538-5556, April.
    19. Amy H. I. Lee & He-Yau Kang & You-Jyun Liou, 2017. "A Hybrid Multiple-Criteria Decision-Making Approach for Photovoltaic Solar Plant Location Selection," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-21, January.
    20. Marsh, Philip & Penesis, Irene & Nader, Jean-Roch & Cossu, Remo, 2021. "Multi-criteria evaluation of potential Australian tidal energy sites," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 175(C), pages 453-469.

    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:spr:endesu:v:24:y:2022:i:4:d:10.1007_s10668-021-01638-z. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.