کاربرد مدل تلفیقی الکترا و ترکیب خطی وزن¬دار در محیط فازی به منظور اولویت¬بندی راهبردهاي مقابله با بيابان¬زایي
محورهای موضوعی : منابع طبیعی
محمد حسن صادقی روش
1
*
,
حسن خسروی
2
1 - دانشیار گروه محیط زیست، دانشکده کشاورزی، دانشگاه آزاد اسلامی واحد تاکستان، تاکستان، ایران. * (مسوول مکاتبات)
2 - استاد گروه احیاء مناطق خشک و کوهستانی، دانشکده منابع طبیعی دانشگاه تهران، تهران، ایران
کلید واژه: انتخاب راهبرد, بیابان¬زایی, روش¬هاي تصميم¬گيري چند معياره فازی, عدد فازی مثلثی, مقايسه زوجي.,
چکیده مقاله :
زمینه و هدف: بیابانزایی یک تهدید جدی محیطزیستی و اقتصادی- اجتماعی جهانی است که در عین وسعت تخریب، گوناگونی اثرات و پیچیدگی فرایند، با شاخصهای کیفی و غیرقطعی نیز سروکار دارد و از رفتار سیستمهای فازی تبعیت میکند. بنابراین در ارزیابی راهبردهای مقابله با بیابانزایی به منظور دستیابی به راهبردهای ارجح و بهینه، استفاده از روشهای تصمیمگیری چند معیاره فازی، ضروری به نظر میرسد. از این رو این پژوهش با هدف تعیین اولویت راهبردهای مقابله با بیابانزایی با استفاده از مدلهای تصمیمگیری در محیط فازی و به صورت موردی در دشت یزد- خضرآباد طی سالهای 1401-1400 به انجام رسید.
روش بررسی: به منظور دستیابی به این هدف، ابتدا از روش دلفی فازی و در چارچوب روش تصمیمگیری چند معیاره، ماتریس تصمیمگیری فازی حاصل شد و سپس با استفاده از نرمافزار اکسپرت چویس و از طریق مدل الکترا اولویت اولیه راهبردها به دست آمد و در ادامه به منظور برآورد اولویت نهایی راهبردها از روش ترکیب خطی وزن دار استفاده شد.
یافته ها: بر مبنای نتایج حاصل‌شده، از دیدگاه مدل ارزیابی الکترا و وی ال سی فازی، راهبردِ جلوگیری از تبدیل و تغییر نامناسب کاربری اراضی (18A) با ضریب اولویت 223/0 و تعدیل در برداشت از منابع آب زیرزمینی (31A) با ضریب اولویت 213/0، تأثیرگذارترین راهبردها به‌منظور دستیابی به هدف ارزیابی شدند.
بحث و نتیجه گیری: بنابراین اهتمام به راهبردهای پیشنهادشده از بین طیف وسیعی از راهبردها، می‌تواند به‌سرعت این اوضاع نابسامان را بهبود بخشیده و ساختاری پایدار در فرایند مقابله با بیابانزایی پی‌ریزی کند. در نهایت پیشنهاد می‌شود طرح‌های مقابله با بیابانزایی، مطابق سند راهبردی به‌دست‌آمده در منطقۀ مطالعاتی بر روی نتایج حاصله تأکید کنند تا از هدررفت سرمایه‌های محدود جلوگیری و بازدهی طرح‌های کنترل، احیا و بازسازی بالا رود.
Background and Objective: Desertification is a serious global environmental and economic-social threat, which, in addition to the extent of destruction, variety of effects and complexity of the process, also deals with qualitative and non-deterministic iindices and follows the behavior of fuzzy systems. It seems necessary to use fuzzy multi-criteria decision-making methods in evaluating the alternatives to deal with desertification in order to achieve the preferred and optimal alternatives. Therefore, this research was carried out with the aim of determining the priority of alternatives to deal with desertification using decision-making models in a fuzzy environment and on a case-by-case basis in the Yazd-Khizrabad plain during 2021-2022.
Material and Methodology: In order to achieve this goal, a fuzzy decision-making matrix was obtained from the fuzzy Delphi method and within the framework of the multi-criteria decision-making method. Then, using Expert Choice software and through the Electra model, the initial priority of the alternatives was obtained, and in order to estimate the final priority of the alternatives, the weighted linear combination method was used.
Findings: Based on the obtained results, from the point of view of Electra and Fuzzy VLC evaluation model, the strategy of preventing the inappropriate conversion and change of land use (18A) with a priority coefficient of 0.223 and adjusting the withdrawal from underground water resources (31A) with a priority coefficient of 0.213 were evaluated as the most effective alternatives in order to achieve the goal.
Discussion and Conclusion: Therefore, paying attention to the proposed strategies from a wide range of strategies can quickly improve this chaotic situation and establish a stable structure in the process of dealing with desertification. Finally, it is suggested that the plans to deal with desertification, according to the strategic document obtained in the study area, emphasize the obtained results in order to prevent the wastage of limited funds and increase the efficiency of control, restoration and reconstruction plans.
1. Saleh, I., Khazaei, M., & Naeimi, M. (2023). Desertification intensity affected by groundwater and land subsidence in Maharloo-Bakhtegan watershedarticle should be cited here according to the format of the references at the end of this guidelines. Water and Soil Management and Modeling, 3(2), 171-184. DOI: 10.22098/mmws.2022.11906.1187
2. Zhao, H. L., He, Y.H., Zhau, R. L., Su, Y. Z., Li, Q.Y., & Drak, S. (2009). Effect of desertification on organic C and N contect in study farmland and grassland of Inner Mongolia. Catena, 77(3), 187-191. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.catena.2008.12.007
3. D’Odorico, P., Bhattachan, A., Davis, k., Ravi, S., & Runyan, C. (2013). Global desertification: Drivers and feedbacks. Advances in Water Resources, 51, 326– 344. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2012.01.013
4. Sepehr, A., & Zucca, C. (2012). Ranking Desertification Indicators Using TOPSIS Algorithm, Journal of Natural Hazards, 62(3), 1137-1153.
5. Bakhshandehmehr, L., Soltani, S., & Sepehr, A. (2013). Assessment of present status of desertification and modifying the MEDALUS model in Segzi plain of Isfahan. Journal of Range & Watershed Management, 66(1), 27-41. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrwm.2013.35326
6. Pishyar, S., Khosravi, H., Tavili, A., & Malekian, M. (2018). Desertification risk mapping based on water resources degradation using multi criteria decision making (Case Study: Kashan Plain). Journal of Water and Soil Science (Journal of Science and Technology of Agriculture and Natural Resources), 21(4), 71-84.Doi: 10.29252/jstnar.21.4.71.
7. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2021). Evaluation of optimal combat to desertification alternatives using special vector technique and Bernardo ranking model. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal, 9 (29), 71-86. dio: 10.22052/DEEJ.2020.9.29.31
8. Yasrebi, B., Ghafari Goosheh, H., Abbasi, H.R., & Behnamfar, K. (2023). Modeling of land use effect on soil crust strength in southeastern Ahvaz. Water and Soil Management and Modeling, 3(2), 286-296. doi:10.22098/mmws.2022.11838.1174
9. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Khosravi, H. (2022). Quantitative evaluation and analysis of combating desertification strategies with multiple decision-making approaches in fuzzy environment. Integrated Watershed Management, 2(2), 31-47. doi: 10.22034/IWM.2022.556144.1035
10. Chasek, P., Akhtar-Schuster, M., Orr, B., Luise, A., Rakoto Ratsimba, H. & Safriel, U. (2019). Land degradation neutrality: The science policy interface from the UNCCD to national implementation. Environmental Science & Policy, 92, 182–190. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsci.2018.11.017
11. United Nations Convention to Combat Desertification (UNCCD). 2017. The global land outlook. Bonn, Germany. https://www.unccd.int/sites/default/files/documents/2017-09/GLO_Full_Report_low_res.pdf
12. Briassoulis, H. (2019). Combating land degradation and desertification: The Land-Use Planning Quandary. Land, 8(27), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.3390/land80200277
13. Kong, Z. H., Stringer, L. C., Paavola, J. & Lu, Q. (2021). Situating China in the global effort to combat desertification. Land, 10(7), 1-22. https://doi.org/10.3390/land10070702
14. Asgharpour, M. J. 2022. Multi-Criteria Decision Making. 14th Edition, Publication of Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
15. Sarkar, S., Parihar, S. M. & Dutta, A. (2016). Fuzzy risk assessment modelling of East Kolkata. Wetland area: A remote sensing and GIS based approach. Environmental Modelling & Software, 75 .105 – 118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envsoft.2015.10.003.
16. Azar, A., & Faraji, H. (2016). Science of fuzzy management. 5th Edition, Mehraban press, Tehran, Iran.
17. Camastra, F., Ciaramella, A., Giovannelli, V., Lener, M., Rastelli, M., Staiano A., Staiano, G. & Starace, A. (2015). A fuzzy decision system for genetically modified plant environmental risk assessment using Mamdani inference. Expert Systems with Applications. 42 (3), 1710 - 1716. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2014.09.041
18. Grau, J. B., Anton, J. M., Tarquis, A. M., Colombo, F., Rios, L. & Cisneros, J. M. (2010). Mathematical model to select the optimal alternative for an integral plan to desertification and erosion control for the Chaco Area in Salta Province (Argentine). Journal of Biogeosciences Discussions, 7, 2601–2630.
19. Sepehr, A., & Parvian, N. (2012). Desertification vulnerability mapping and developing combating strategies in the ecosystem of Khorasan Razavi Province using PROMETHEE algorithm. Researches in Earth Sciences, 2(4), 58-71.
20. Heidari, S. B., & Bagherzadeh Chahar Joei, A. (2017). Sustainable combat desertification strategies in Sabzevar plain based on analytical hierarchy model (TOPSIS) and preference ranking technique (AHP). Sixth National Conference on Agriculture and Sustainable Natural Resources. Tehran. Iran. https://civilica.com/doc/573574
21. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2021). Analysis of the combating desertification alternatives derived from the decision-making models using the GRV function. Degradation and Rehabilitation of Natural Land, 1(2), 13-25.
22. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2021). Introducing a new approach for prioritizing combating desertification strategies based on multi- attribute decision making. Iranian Journal of Applied Ecology, 9(4), 15-33. Doi: 10.47176/ijae.9.4.12571
23. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2022). Application of Interpretive Structural Modelling (ISM) in analyzing obstacles to combat desertification with pathological approach in Yazd province. Journal of Watershed Management Research, 13(25), 119-132. doi: 10.52547/jwmr.13.25.119
24. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2022). Prioritization of combating desertification strategies in Yazd- Khezr Abad plain by using Cook and Seiford method. Journal of Water and Soil Science (JWSS), 26(2), 313-326. doi: 10.47176/jwss.26.2.23842
25. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Khosravi, H. (2020-b). Identifying the most appropriate of combat desertification alternatives by using the Eigenvector Method and the Vikor Model. Journal of Natural Environmental Hazards, 9(25), 41-60. doi: 10.22111/JNEH.2020.30915.1544
26. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Khosravi, H. (2021). Quantitative analysis of combating desertification alternatives using LINMAP model in Lingo software environment. Desert Management, 8(16), 57-76. doi: 10.22034/JDMAL.2021.243140
27. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2022-b). Applying fuzzy logic in quantitative analysis of strategies adopted for combating desertification using critical analysis approach. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal (DEEJ), 11(34), 15-32. doi: 10.22052/DEEJ.2021.11.34.11
28. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Tahmores, M. (2014). Assessment of combat desertification alternatives using Fuzzy Topsis Model (FTOPSIS), Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering, 1(3), 79-94.
29. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Khosravi, H. & Ghasemian, S. (2015). Application of Fuzzy Analytical Hierarchy Process (FAHP) for assessment of combating-desertification alternatives in the central Iran. Journal of Natural Hazard, 75 (1), 653-667.
30. Sharifi, M., & Farahbakhsh, Z. (2016). Investigation about temperature and humidity anomalies between pleistocene and present times؛ reconstruction of climate condition using geomorphic evidence (case study: Khezrabad-Yazd). Physical Geography Researches, 47(4), 583-605. doi: 10.22059/JPHGR.2015.56051
31. Gharachelo, S., Ekhtesasi, M. R., Zareian Jahromi, M. & Samadi, M. B. (2021). Evaluation of current condition of desertification using I.C.D Model, case study: Khezrabad, Yazd. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Reseach, 17(3), 402-420.
32. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2023), Sensitivity analysis of combat desertification strategies in Fuzzy environment in Yazd-Khezrabad sub-catchment (Saduq County). Journal of Watershed Management Research, 13(26), 203-214. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.52547/jwmr.13.26.203
33. Benayoun, R, Roy, B, & Sussman, N. (1966). Manual de Referance du Programme ELECTRE. Note de Synthese et Formation, No. 25, Direction Scientifique SEMA, Paris. Canter, L.W.(1996) Environmental Impact Assessment. Paris: McGraw Hill.
34. Wang, X., & Triantaphyllou, E. (2008). Ranking irregularities when evaluating alternatives by using some ELECTRE methods, Omega, 36(1), 45 – 63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2005.12.003
35. Hwang, C., Yoon, K. (1981). Multiple attribute decision making: methods and applications. lecture notes in economics and mathematical systems, New York: Chapman & Hall.
36. Asgharizadeh, E., & Mohammadi Balani, A. (2021). Multi-attribute decision making techniques. 4th Edition, Publication of Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
37. Sevkli, M. (2010). An application of the Fuzzy ELECTRE method for supplier selection. International Journal of Production Research. 48(12), 3393-3405.
38. Komsiyah, S., Wongso, R., & Pratiwi, S. W. (2019), Applications of the Fuzzy ELECTRE method for decision support systems of cement vendor selection. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Computer Science and Computational Intelligence (ICCSCI), Yogyakarta, Indonesia.
39. Saaty, T. L. (1995). Decision making for leaders. The Analytic Hierarchy Process for decisions in a complex word. 3th Edition, RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Germany.
40. Asgharpour, M. J. (2022). Multi-Criteria Decision Making. 14th Edition, Publication of Tehran University, Tehran, Iran.
41. Azar, A., & Rajabzadeh, R. (2022). Applied decision making with an approach of Multi-Attribute Decision Making (MADM). 8th Edition, Publication of Negah Danesh, Tehran, Iran.
42. Zare, A., & Ahmadi Naseri, S. M. (2007). Presentation of stability index using fuzzy AHP sensitivity analysis. Proceedings of the 1th Fuzzy and Intelligent Systems Conference, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
43. Saaty, T. L. (2008). The analytical hierarchy and analytical network measurement processes: application to decisions under risk. European Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics, 1(1), 122-196.
44. Dehbozorgi, M., Jafari, J., Malekian, A., Zehtabian, G. and Fallah Shamsi, S. R. (2020). Assessment the instability and land degradation using fuzzy methods, hierarchical analysis and weighted linear combination (Case study: Bakhtegan watershed, Fars). Journal of Range and Watershed Management. 73 (2), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.22059/jrwm.2018.252394.1233
45. Tong, S., Sun, Y., Ranatunga, T., He, J., & Yng, Y. (2013). Predicting plausible impacts of sets of climate and land use change scenarios on water resource. Applied Geography, 32(2), 477-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeog.2011.06.014
46. Li, J., Yang, X., Jin, Y., Yang, Z., Huang, W., Zhao, L., Gao, T., Yo, H., Ma, H., Qin, Z., & Xu, B. (2013). Monitoring and analysis of grassland desertification dynamics using Landsat images in Ningxia China. Remote Sensing of Environment, 138, 19-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2013.07.010
47. Barzani, M., & O. S. Khairulmaini, O. S. (2013). Desertification risk mapping of the Zayandeh Rood basin in Iran. Journal of Earth System Science, 122(5), 1269-1282.
48. Jafary, M., Zehtabian, G., Ehsani, A. H. (2014). Investigation on the changes of desert lands using remote sensing data, Case study: Kashan. Iranian Journal of Range and Desert Research, 20(4), 644-652.
49. Zehtabian, G.R., Ahmadi, H., Raesi, A., Rahdari, M. R., & Khosravi, H. (2014). Quantitative assessment of desertification with emphasis on geo-climatology. Elixir International Journal, 68, 22474-22477.
50. Zehtabian, G. R., Poorreza, M., Khosravi, H., & Rahdari, M. (2015). The effects of land use change on land degradation and desertification in Ravansar watershed. Journal of Arid Regions Geographics Studies, 5(16), 73-85.
51. Moradi, A. R., Jafari, M., Arzani, H., & Ebrahimi, M. (2016). Assessment of land use changes into dry land using satellite images and Geographical Information System (GIS). RS & GIS Techniques for Natural Resources, 7(1), 89-100.
52. Hasheminasab, S., & Jafari, R. (2018). Evaluation of land use changes order to desertification monitoring using remote sensing techniques. Journal of Spatial Analysis Environmental Hazards, 5(3): 67-82. doi:10.29252/jsaeh.5.3.67
53. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2013). Assessment of combat desertification alternatives using Permutation method, case study: Khezrabad region, Yazd province. Journal of Environmental Management and Planning, 3(4), 5-14.
54. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2014). Evaluation of combat desertification alternatives by using BORDA ranking model, Case study: Khezrabad region, Yazd province. Journal of Environmental Management and Planning, 4(2), 5-16.
55. Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., & Khosravi. H. (2016). Evaluation of combat desertification alternatives by using Individual Borda Ranking model. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal (DEEJ), 5(12), 109-121.
56. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Jabalbarezi, B. (2019), Rating the alternatives to combat desertification alternatives by using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT), Case study of Khezerabad region in Yazd Province, Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 21(8), 101-112. doi: 10.22034/JEST.2019.24438.3346
57. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Ahmadi, H., Zehtabian, G. H., & Tahmores, M. (2010). Application of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in assessment of combatdesertification alternatives, case study: Khezrabad region, Yazd province. Iranian journal of Range and Desert Research, 17(1), 35-50. https://www.sid.ir/paper/106830/fa
58. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Zehtabian, G. R., Ahmadi, H., & Khosravi, H. (2012). Using analytic hierarchy process method and ordering technique to assess combat desertification alternatives, case study: Khezrabad, Yazd, Iran. Carpathian journal of earth and environmental sciences, 7(3), 51-60.
59. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Zehtabian, G. R., & Khosravi, H. (2014). Application of AHP and ELECTRE models for assessment of combat desertification alternatives in central Iran. DESERT, 19-2,141-153. doi: 10.22059/JDESERT.2014.52336
60. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Khosravi, H., & Abolhasani, A. (2016). Evaluation of combating desertification alternatives using PROMETHEE model. Journal of Geography and Geology, 8 (2), 1-14. doi:10.5539/jgg.v8n2p1
61. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., Khosravi, H., & Ghasemian, S. (2016). Assessment of combating strategies using the Liner Assignment (LA) method. Journal of Solid Earth, 7(2), 673-683. https://doi.org/10.5194/se-7-673-2016, 2016
62. Sadeghiravesh, M. H, Ahmadi, H, & Zehtabian, G. (2011). Application of sensitivity analysis for assessment of de-desertification alternatives in the central Iran by using Triantaphyllou method. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 179, 31-46. doi: DOI 10.1007/s10661-010-1717-8
63. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Zehtabian, G. (2013). Combat desertification strategies classification with using of Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) view point and Weighted Sum Model (WSM), Case study: Khezrabad region, Yazd province. Journal of Pajouhesh & Sazandeghi, 100:1-11.
64. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Khosravi, H. (2015). Application of Network Analysis Process (ANP) in assessment of combating desertification alternatives. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal (DEEJ), 4(8), 11-24.
65. Sadeghiravesh, M. H. (2019). Evaluation of combatdesertification alternatives In Ardekan- Khezr Abad plain by using Shannon Entropy method and ORESTE model. Quarterly Journal of Environmental Erosion Research, 8(4), 19-40.
66. Sadeghiravesh, M. H., & Khosravi. H. (2020). Analysis of the alternatives to combat desertification derived from the decision-making models using the Social Choice functions, case study of Khezerabad region in Yazd province. Journal of Environment Science and Technology (JEST), 22(4), 227-239. doi: 10.22034/JEST.2019.29505.3807
67. Sadeghiravesh M. H. (2018). Analysis of the desertification strategies derived from the decision-making models using social welfare function of B&C. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal (DEEJ), 7(18), 37–48. doi:10.22052/DEEJ.2018.7.18.35
68. Daneshi, A., Najafinejad., N., Panahi, M., & Zarandian, Z. (2020). Projecting land use change effects on habitat quality of Narmab dam basin in Golestan province. Degradation and Rehabilitation of Natural Land, 1(1), 120-130.