Decision-making models using the Analytical Hierarchy Process in the urgency of land consolidation works

Abstract

Poland is characterized by a number of factors which adversely affect the agricultural economy, so this paper will aim to present the possibilities of using multi-criteria decision-making methods of Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in the analysis of the spatial structure of rural areas. AHP is a widely used tool for making complex decisions based on a large number of criteria, such as, for example, land consolidation works on fragmented agricultural land. The first step is to formulate the decision-making process, then the assessment criteria and the solution variants guided by expert knowledge are determined.

A ranking, according to which the order of land consolidation and land exchange works in the studied area should be determined, will be defined by using decision-making models of the AHP method. The basis for calculations will be the weights received for the factors/parameters defined for the five thematic groups. Calculations for individual villages will be made, and then the obtained results will allow creating a ranking for the studied commune, allowing for the effective (in terms of economic and socio-economic) spending of funds for this purpose. The presented method can be successfully used to conduct analogous analyses for any area.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • Adamus W., Łasak P. 2010. Zastosowanie metody AHP do wyboru umiejscowienia nadzoru nad rynkiem finansowym [The application of the Analytic Hierarchy Process to deciding about the location of financial market supervision]. Bank i Kredyt. Vol. 41. No. 4 p. 73–100.

  • Downarowicz O., Krause J., Sikorski M., Stachowski W. 2000. Zastosowanie metody AHP do oceny i sterowania poziomem bezpieczeństwa złożonego obiektu technicznego. W: Wybrane metody ergonomii i nauki o eksploatacji [Application of AHP method for evaluation and safety control of a complex technical system. Selected methods of ergonomics and exploitation science]. Gdańsk. Wydaw. Politechniki Gdańskiej p. 7–42.

  • Dudzińska M., Jasińska E., Kocur-Bera K., L P., Preweda E., Sajnóg N., Sobolewska-Mikulska K., Steinsholt H., Walacik M., Wójcik J. 2014. Directions for land management in rural areas. Zagreb–Olsztyn–Katowice. Croatian Information Technology Society, GIS Forum, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, University of Silesia. ISBN 978-953-6129-40-9 pp. 74.

  • Hung P.V., Macaulay G., Marsh S.P. 2007. The economics of land fragmentation in the north of Vietnam. The Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics. Vol. 51 p. 195–211. DOI 10.1111/j.1467-8489.2007.00378.x.

  • Kazak J.K., van Hoof J. 2018. Decision support systems for a sustainable management of the indoor and built environment. Indoor and Built Environment. Vol. 27(10) p. 1303–1306. DOI 10.1177/1420326X18799812.

  • Latruffe L., Piet L. 2013. Does land fragmentation affect farm performance? A case study from Brittany, France [online]. Working Papers Smart – LERECO. No. 13-04 p. 1–27. [Access 05.05.2019]. Available at: https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01133262/document

  • Lee S., Kim W., Kim M. Y., Oh K.J. 2012. Using AHP to determine intangible priority factors for technology transfer adoption. Expert Systems with Applications. Vol. 39. Iss. 7 p. 6388–6395. DOI 10.1016/j.eswa.2011.12.030.

  • L P., Mika M. 2016. Determination of the urgency of undertaking land consolidation works in the villages of the Sławno municipality. Journal of Ecological Engineering. Vol. 17. Iss. 4 p. 163–169. DOI 10.12911/22998993/64827.

  • L P., Oleniacz G., Skrzypczak I., Mika M. 2016. The Hellwig’s and zero unitarisation methods in creating a ranking of the urgency of land consolidation and land exchange work. 16th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2016, www.sgem.org, SGEM2016 Conference Proceedings. June 28–July 6, 2016. Book 2. Vol. 2 p. 617–624. DOI 10.5593/SGEM2016/B22/S09.080.

  • Mika M., Salata T. 2015. The use of local databases of spatial information for the preservation of spatial order on example of selected units of local government in Poland. 15th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2015, Informatics, Geomatics and Remote Sensing, Conference Proceedings. Vol. 2. Cartography & GIS p. 1163–1173, Bulgaria 2015. DOI 10.5593/SGEM2015/B22/S11.145.

  • Noga K., L P. 2010. Analiza rozdrobnienia gruntów indywidualnych we wsiach powiatu Brzozów [Analysis of the fragmentation of private land in the villages of the district Brzozow]. Infrastruktura i Ekologia Terenów Wiejskich. Nr 3 p. 55–64.

  • Pires A., Chang N.B., Martinho G. 2011. An AHP-based fuzzy interval TOPSIS assessment for sustainable expansion of the solid waste management system in Setubal Peninsula, Portugal. Resources, Conservation and Recycling. Vol. 56. Iss. 1 p. 7–21. DOI 10.1016/j.resconrec.2011.08.004.

  • Regulation (EU) No 1305/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 on support for rural development by the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1698/2005.

  • Saaty T.L. 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology. Vol. 15 (3) p. 234–281.

  • Saaty T.L. 1980. The analytic hierarchy process. New York-London. McGraw-Hill International Book Co. ISBN 0070543712 pp. 287.

  • Saaty T.L. 2006. Rank from comparisons and from ratings in the analytic hierarchy, network processes. European Journal of Operational Research. Vol. 168. Iss. 2 p. 557–570. DOI 10.1016/j.ejor.2004.04.032.

  • Sobolewska-Mikulska K. 2015. The importance of planning documents for the land validation process in Poland. In: 15th International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference SGEM 2015, www.sgem.org, SGEM2015 Conference Proceedings. 18–24 June 2015. Book 2. Vol. 2 p. 515–522. DOI 10.5593/SGEM2015/B22/S9.064.

  • Tan S., Heerink N., Qu F. 2006. Land fragmentation and its driving forces in China. Land Use Policy. Vol. 23. Iss. 3 p. 272–285. DOI 10.1016/j.landusepol.2004.12.001.

  • Van Dijk T. 2003. Scenarios of Central European land fragmentation. Land Use Policy. Vol. 20. Iss. 2 p. 149–158. DOI 10.1016/S0264-8377(02)00082-0.

OPEN ACCESS

Journal + Issues

Search