Approach of decision making based on the analytic hierarchy process for urban landscape management

Environmental Management

Volumn 51, Issue 3, 2013, Pages 777-785

  Srdjevic, Zorica ^a   Lakicevic, Milena ^a   Srdjevic, Bojan ^a  

^a University of Novi Sad   (Serbia)

Author keywords

Analytic hierarchy process; Group decision making; Multi criteria decision making; Urban landscape planning

Indexed keywords

BELGRADE , SERBIA; CONVERGENCE MODEL; DECISION-MAKING PROBLEM; GEOMETRIC MEAN METHOD; GROUP DECISION MAKING; LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT; MULTI-CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; URBAN LANDSCAPE PLANNING;

ANALYTIC HIERARCHY PROCESS; FORESTRY; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE;

DECISION MAKING;

ANALYTICAL HIERARCHY PROCESS; DECISION MAKING; LAND MANAGEMENT; LANDSCAPE PLANNING; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; URBAN PLANNING; URBAN RENEWAL;

ARTICLE; DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; LANDSCAPE ECOLOGY; MANAGEMENT STYLE; REVEGETATION; SERBIA; STRATEGIC PLANNING; URBAN AREA;

CITIES; CITY PLANNING; CONSERVATION OF NATURAL RESOURCES; DECISION MAKING; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; HUMANS; MODELS, THEORETICAL; SERBIA; TREES;

DECISION MAKING; FORESTRY; PLANNING;

BELGRADE; SERBIA;

EID: 84879505460     PISSN: 0364152X     EISSN: 14321009     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00267-012-9990-7     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Altuzarra A, Moreno-Jimenez JM, Salvador MA (2007) Bayesian priorization procedure for AHP-group decision making. Eur J Oper Res 182(1):367-382. doi: 10.1016/j.ejor.2006.07.025
2. Ananda J, Herath G (2003) The use of analytic hierarchy process to incorporate stakeholder preferences into regional forest planning. For Policy Econ 5(1):13-26. doi: 10.1016/S1389-9341(02)00043-6
3. Bacic ILZ, Bregt AK, Rossiter DG (2006) A participatory approach for integrating risk assessment into rural decision-making: a case study in Santa Catarina, Brazil. Agric Syst 87(2):229-244. doi: 10.1016/j.agsy.2005.01.008
4. Crawford G, Williams C (1985) A note on the analysis of subjective judgement matrices. J Math Psychol 29:387-405. doi: 10.1016/0022-2496(85)90002-1
5. Faizi M, Behzadfar M, Razzaghi Asl S (2011) A conceptual framework for interacting landscape architects and urban designers: professionals' perspectives. Int J Environ Res 5(2):271-276
6. Feng MM (2007) The esthetic evaluation of urban plants landscape based on the model of AHP-fuzzy comprehensive evaluation. J Hangzhou Teach Coll Nat Sci Ed 5:56-61. doi: CNKI:SUN:HSFZ.0.2007-05-013
7. Forman E, Peniwati K (1998) Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the analytic hierarchy process. Eur J Oper Res 108(1):165-169. doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0
8. González-Pachón J, Romero C (2007) Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties. Ann Oper Res 154(1):123-132. doi: 10.1007/s10479-007-0182-4
9. Griffith TL, Fuller MA, Northcraft GB (1998) Facilitator influence in group support systems: some intended and unintended effects. Inf Syst Res 9(1):20-36. doi: 10.1287/isre.9.1.20
10. Grimble R, Wellard K (1997) Stakeholder methodologies in natural resource management: a review of principles, contexts, experiences and opportunities. Agric Syst 55(2):173-193. doi: 10.1016/S0308-521X(97)00006-1
11. Gül A, Gezer A, Kane B (2006) Multi-criteria analysis for locating new urban forests: an example from Isparta, Turkey. Urban For Urban Green 5(2):57-71. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2006.05.003
12. Harrison SR, Qureshi ME (2000) Choice of stakeholder groups and members in multicriteria decision models. Nat Resour Forum 24(1):11-19. doi: 10.1111/j.1477-8947.2000.tb00925.x
13. Hein L, van Koppen K, de Groot RS, van Ierland EC (2006) Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services. Ecol Econ 57(2):209-228. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2005.04.005
14. Hensley DL (2004) Professional landscape management. Stipes Publishing L.L.C., Champaign, p 1
15. Jansson M, Lindgren T (2012) A review of the concept 'management' in relation to urban landscapes and green spaces: toward a holistic understanding. Urban For Urban Green 11:139-145. doi: 10.1016/j.ufug.2012.01.004
16. Kangas J, Store R, Kangas A (2005) Socioecological landscape planning approach and multicriteria acceptability analysis in multiple-purpose forest management. For Policy Econ 7(4):603-614. doi: 10.1016/j.forpol.2003.12.001
17. Kim K, Sato S (2000) Evaluation of urban landscape problem using analytic hierarchy process method. In: Fruchter R, Feniosky PM, Roddis WMK (eds) Computing in civil and building engineering. American Society of Civil Engineers, Stanford, pp 442-448. doi: 10.1061/40513(279)58
18. Kontic B, Bohanec M, Urbancic T (2006) An experiment in participative environmental decision making. Environmentalist 26(1):5-15. doi: 10.1007/s10669-006-5353-3
19. Lakicevic M, Srdjevic B (2011) Application of analytic hierarchy process in landscape management: case study area Kosutnjak park-forest. Bull Serbian Geogr Soc 91(1):51-64. doi: 10.2298/GSGD1101051L
20. Lehrer K, Wagner C (1981) Rational consensus in science and society. Reidel, Dordrecht
21. Li KL (2005) Using analytic hierarchy process in urban road landscape evaluation. Eng J Wuhan Univ 38(1):143-147. doi: cnki:ISSN:1006-155X.0.2005-01- 00V
22. Marchamalo M, Romero C (2007) Participatory decision-making in land use planning: an application in Costa Rica. Ecol Econ 63(4):740-748. doi: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2007.01.006
23. Moreno-Jimenénez JM, Aguarón J, Escobar MT (2008) The core of consistency in AHP-group decision making. Group Decis Negot 17(3):249-265. doi: 10.1007/s10726-007-9072-z
24. Reed MS (2008) Stakeholder participation for environmental management: a literature review. Biol Conserv 141(10):2417-2431. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2008. 07.014
25. Regan HM, Colyvan M, Markovchick-Nicholls L (2006) A formal model for consensus and negotiation in environmental management. J Environ Manag 80(2):167-176. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2005.09.004
26. Saaty TL (1980) The analytical hierarchy process. McGraw Hill, New York
27. Saaty TL (1990) Eigenvector and logarithmic least squares. Eur J Oper Res 48:156-160. doi: 10.1016/0377-2217(90)90073-K
28. Srdjevic B (2005) Combining different prioritization methods in the analytic hierarchy process synthesis. Comput Oper Res 32:1897-1919. doi: 10.1016/j.cor.2003.12.005
29. Srdjevic B, Srdjevic Z (2011) Bi-criteria evolution strategy in estimating weights from the AHP ratio-scale matrices. Appl Math Comput 218:1254-1266. doi: 10.1016/j.amc.2011.06.006