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)

Subject Areas : environmental management

mohammad hassan  sadeghi ravesh ¹ (Associate Professor, Department of Environment, Takestan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Takestan, Iran *(Corresponding Author))
Hassan  Khosravi ² (Associate Professor, Department of Desertification, Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Tehran , Tehran, Iran.)

Received: 2017-08-09 Accepted : 2017-12-20 Published : 2020-06-21

Keywords: Hierarchy structure, decision making models, Social choice functions, Kemenyʼs function, Nansonʼs function, Gopelandʼs function,

Abstract :

Background and Purpose: Different decision-making models are applied for assessing and providing the desertification optimal strategies through taking into account the total effective measures that sometimes the results of the prioritization of these models are not consistent. This issue depends on the nature of the model, the considered criteria, and the way of weighing the criteria as a group by the experts. So, there is need for presenting some functions in some groups to prioritize the strategies offered in each region by the different models on the basis of logic and strong principles and theoretical foundations. Methods: In this paper, it has been tried to do so by using the Social Choice functions. The Social Choice functions are a counting method from a set of given alternatives to resolve the voting paradox and the inconsistency of prioritizing. Therefore, for the final selection from the Nanson, Kemeny and Gopeland functions are used and the desertification strategies were analyzed. Findings: The obtained results from functions indicated that, the alternatives of prevention of unsuitable land use changes (A18), vegetation cover development and reclamation (A23) and modification of ground water harvesting (A31) respectively were identified as the most important alternatives for combating desertification in the region. Discussion and Conclusion: The results of the evaluation of the strategies showed that the obtained rankings are somewhat different from each other, which is mainly due to the structure of the methods. The results of this study enable the managers of desert areas to use the limited facilities and funds allocated to control the desertification process in correct and efficient ways in order to achieve better results, to avoid wastage. Prevent the outflow of national funds. Therefore, it was suggested that in the plans to control and reduce the effects of desertification and rehabilitation of degraded lands, the results and rankings obtained should be considered.

References:

         1.         Reynolds, J. F., 2008. Cutting through the confusion: Desertification, an old problem viewed through the lens of a new framework, the Dry lands Development Paradigm (DDP). Dry lands, Deserts & Desertification Conference, December 14-17. Sede Boque Campus, Israel.

         2.         Ahmadi, H., 2005.Studing the factors affecting the desertification. Journal of Forest and Range, Vol 62, pp. 66-70. (Persian)

3. 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 Discuss,Vol 7, pp. 2601–2630.

         4.         Sadeghi Rravesh, M. H., Ahmadi, H., Zehtabian, G. h., Tahmores, M., 2010. Application of analytical hierarchy process (AHP) in assessment of de-desertification alternatives, case study: Khezrabad region. Iranian journal of Range and Desert Research, Vol 17 (1), pp. 35-50. (Persian)

         5.         Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., Zehtabian, G. R., Ahmadi, H., Khosravi, H., 2012. Using analytic hierarchy prosess method and ordering technique to assess de-desertification alternatives, case study: Khezrabad, Yazd, IRAN, Carpathian journal of earth and environmental sciences, Vol 7, pp. 51-60.

         6.         Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., Khosravi, H., 2014.  Application of AHP and ELECTRE models for Assessment of de-desertification alternatives in Central Iran, DESERT, Vol 19-2, pp.141-153.

         7.         Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., Zehtabian, G. R., 2013. Combat desertification alternatives classification with using of Multi Attribute Decision Making (MADM) view point and Weighted Sum Model (WSM), Case study: Khezrabad region. Watershed Management Researches, Vol 100, pp. 1-11. (Persian)

         8.          Sadeghi Ravesh, 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, Vol 1, pp. 13-24. (Persian)

         9.         Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., 2013. Assessment of Combat Desertification Alternatives Using Permutation method, case study: Khezrabad region, Yazd province. Journal of environmental management and planning, Vol 10, pp. 1-10. (Persian)

       10.       Sadeghi Rravesh, M. H.,  Khosravi, H., 2015. Application of network analysis process (ANP) in assessment of combating desertification alternatives. Desert Ecosystem Engineering Journal(DEEJ), Vol 4 (8), pp. 11-24. (Persian)

       11.       Sadeghi Ravesh, M, H., Khosravi, H., Ghasemian, S., 2016. Assessment of combating strategies using the Liner Assignment method, Journal of Solid Earth, Vol 7, pp. 673-683.

       12.       Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., Tahmoures, M., 2016. Evaluation of effective strategies in de-desertification using DEMATEL model, Environmental Conservation Journal (In Press).

       13.       Sadeghi Ravesh, M. H., Khosravi, H., 2017. Rating the Alternatives to Combat Desertification using Multi-Attribute Utility Theory (MAUT), Case Study: Khezerabad Region of Yazd Province. Journal of Environmental Science and Engineering (In press). (Persian)

       14.       Sadeghi Ravesh, M, H., Khosravi, H., Abolhasani, A., Shekoohizadeghan, S., 2016. Evaluation of de-desertification alternatives by using PROMETHEE model in Khezrabad region, Journal of Geography and Geology, Vol 8(2), pp. 1-14.

15. Sepehr, A., Peroyan, N., 2011. Vulnerability mapping of desertification and combat desertification alternative ranking in Korasan-e-razavi province ecosystems with application PROMETHEE model, Journal of Earth science researches, Vol 8, pp. 58-71.

       16.       Sadeghi Ravesh MH (2008) Investigation of effective desertification factors on environment degradation. Ph.D. Thesis, Islamic Azad University, Science and Research Branch, Tehran, Iran. (Persian)

17. Arrow, K. J., 1963. Social choice and individual values, Yale University press, New Haven, Connecticut, United State.


18. Arrow, K. J., Raynaud, H., 1986. Social choice and Multi Criteria Decision Making, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusett, United State.


19. Fishborn, P. C., 1977. Condorcet social choice functions, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, Vol 33(3), pp. 469-489.

       20.       Asgharpur, M., 2003. Group decision and game theory, operations research approach, Tehran University Publishing, Tehran, Iran. (Persian)

       21.       Kemeny, J. G., Snell, J. L., 1972. Mathematical models in the Social sciences, MIT press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, United State.