کد مقاله | کد نشریه | سال انتشار | مقاله انگلیسی | نسخه تمام متن |
---|---|---|---|---|
93627 | 160134 | 2009 | 10 صفحه PDF | دانلود رایگان |
![عکس صفحه اول مقاله: Accounting for farmers’ production responses to environmental restrictions within landscape planning Accounting for farmers’ production responses to environmental restrictions within landscape planning](/preview/png/93627.png)
Environmental planning aims to safeguard and foster the ecological functionality of agricultural landscapes. In order to reach a sustainable development of agricultural landscapes, in addition to ecological objectives socio-economic ones also need to be considered. In this context, the authors draw attention to three points. First, whenever ecologically sensitive areas (“ecological sites”) are used for agricultural production, it is necessary to take account of the fact that farmers tend to adapt to environmental requirements by production responses outside the ecological site itself. Second, in order to identify the socially most “desirable” land-use responses it is necessary to supplement the above-mentioned environmental objectives by socio-economic ones. Third, when choosing an appropriate model for such multi-criteria decision analysis, the question of substitutability between criteria is of utmost importance. The paper discusses the above-mentioned issues against the background of a case study of environmental planning for an ecologically very valuable agricultural landscape in Germany, the Bayerisches Donauried. Two models of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) are applied, one based on the “single synthesizing criterion” method, and the other one based on the “synthesis by outranking” method. The models serve to evaluate four different land-use options, using criteria mainly derived from landscape functions and weights gained from interviews with major stakeholders. The paper presents the models’ results concerning the ranking of the different land-use options and discusses the implications for agri-environmental policies and rural development planning.
Journal: Land Use Policy - Volume 26, Issue 4, October 2009, Pages 925–934