Livelihood alternatives model for sustainable rangeland management: a review of multi-criteria decision-making techniques

Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand, Hossein Azadi (), Dereje Teklemariam, Ehsan Houshyar, Philippe Maeyer and Frank Witlox
Additional contact information
Hojatollah Khedrigharibvand: Ghent University
Hossein Azadi: Ghent University
Dereje Teklemariam: Ghent University
Ehsan Houshyar: Jahrom University
Philippe Maeyer: Ghent University
Frank Witlox: Ghent University

Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, 2019, vol. 21, issue 1, No 2, 36 pages

Abstract: Abstract Although a set of appropriate livelihood alternatives has already been developed to approach sustainable rangeland management (SRM), determining an appropriate livelihood model for supporting policy makers still remains to be a challenge. Livelihood alternatives are affected by multiple factors such as livelihood capital, vulnerability contexts as well as policies, institutions and processes which can be identified by stakeholders from different perspectives. Accordingly, determining appropriate livelihood alternatives is a multifaceted challenge that requires multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) techniques. This paper aims to review MCDM methods that have the potential to be applied in SRM. It discusses how different MCDM techniques can be used and which techniques are well matched to determine appropriate livelihood alternatives. First, it justifies the need for decision support systems followed by an explanation of the most common MCDM techniques. Among them, two techniques, namely analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and Technique for Order Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), are found to be the most suitable MCDM in the case of SRM. Furthermore, based on the reviews on different hybrid approaches, AHP–TOPSIS is introduced as a superior approach to select appropriate livelihood alternatives. Accordingly, AHP is introduced to elicit the relative importance of livelihood criteria and TOPSIS is employed to provide a score for livelihood alternatives. As a conclusion, the application of AHP–TOPSIS approach is proposed where many decision criteria, alternatives and stakeholders are involved. Subsequently, a methodological framework to determine a livelihood model is also developed. This study concludes that, as well as recognizing the theory of appropriate livelihood alternatives, the application of MCDM techniques can be further pursued toward devising a workable policy framework for SRM. At the end, we have elaborated future methodological issues to be considered when selecting feasible alternatives to resolve the current challenges in SRM.

Keywords: Livelihood alternatives; Policy makers; Decision tool; Livelihood alternatives decision making; AHP–TOPSIS approach (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (4)

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-017-0035-5 Abstract (text/html)
Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:endesu:v:21:y:2019:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-017-0035-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/economics/journal/10668

DOI: 10.1007/s10668-017-0035-5

Access Statistics for this article

Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development is currently edited by Luc Hens

More articles in Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().