IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/fan/scresc/vhtml10.3280-scre2014-s01003.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Landscape Protection Really Matter? An Assessment Based on Multicriteria Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Corrado Zoppi

Abstract

This article analyses and evaluates the degree of consensus of the residents of the municipality of Sinnai, a small coastal town in Southern Sardinia, on four proposals concerning a portion of the coastal strip defined by four junior planners at the school of urban planning of the University of Cagliari (Italy), who also proposed a set of criteria for deciding which of the four proposals was the most suitable. The research reported in the paper moved through two steps. First, proposals and criteria were defined. Second, a questionnaire was administered to residents of Sinnai. An Analytic Hierarchy Process multicriteria analysis procedure was used to draw conclusions on the experiment.

Suggested Citation

  • Corrado Zoppi, 2014. "Does Landscape Protection Really Matter? An Assessment Based on Multicriteria Analysis," SCIENZE REGIONALI, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2014(1 Suppl.), pages 47-69.
    • Handle: RePEc:fan:scresc:v:html10.3280/scre2014-s01003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/Scheda_Rivista.aspx?IDArticolo=50385&Tipo=ArticoloPDF
    Download Restriction: Single articles can be downloaded buying download credits, for info: https://www.francoangeli.it/DownloadCredit
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stanley Zionts & Jyrki Wallenius, 1983. "An Interactive Multiple Objective Linear Programming Method for a Class of Underlying Nonlinear Utility Functions," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 29(5), pages 519-529, May.
    2. A. M. Geoffrion & J. S. Dyer & A. Feinberg, 1972. "An Interactive Approach for Multi-Criterion Optimization, with an Application to the Operation of an Academic Department," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 19(4-Part-1), pages 357-368, December.
    3. P Nijkamp, 1993. "Border Regions and Infrastructure Networks in the European Integration Process," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 11(4), pages 431-446, December.
    4. Belton, Valerie, 1986. "A comparison of the analytic hierarchy process and a simple multi-attribute value function," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 26(1), pages 7-21, July.
    5. Christian Heij & Peter Nijkamp & Sytze A. Rienstra & Dieter Rothenberger, 1997. "Assessing Scenarios on European Transport Policies by Means of Multicriteria Analysis," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 97-086/3, Tinbergen Institute.
    6. Saaty, Thomas L. & Cho, Yeonmin, 2001. "The decision by the US congress on China's trade status: a multicriteria analysis," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 243-252, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Kaliszewski, Ignacy & Michalowski, Wojtek, 1999. "Searching for psychologically stable solutions of multiple criteria decision problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 118(3), pages 549-562, November.
    2. Nikolaos Argyris & Alec Morton & José Rui Figueira, 2014. "CUT: A Multicriteria Approach for Concavifiable Preferences," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 62(3), pages 633-642, June.
    3. Aloysius, John A. & Davis, Fred D. & Wilson, Darryl D. & Ross Taylor, A. & Kottemann, Jeffrey E., 2006. "User acceptance of multi-criteria decision support systems: The impact of preference elicitation techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 169(1), pages 273-285, February.
    4. M Köksalan & E Karasakal, 2006. "An interactive approach for multiobjective decision making," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 57(5), pages 532-540, May.
    5. Corner, J. L. & Buchanan, J. T., 1997. "Capturing decision maker preference: Experimental comparison of decision analysis and MCDM techniques," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(1), pages 85-97, April.
    6. Park, K. Sam & Shin, Dong Eun, 2012. "Interactive multiobjective optimization approach to the input–output design of opening new branches," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 220(2), pages 530-538.
    7. Aksoy, Yasemin & Butler, Timothy W. & Minor, Elliott D., 1996. "Comparative studies in interactive multiple objective mathematical programming," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 89(2), pages 408-422, March.
    8. J. Cabello & M. Luque & F. Miguel & A. Ruiz & F. Ruiz, 2014. "A multiobjective interactive approach to determine the optimal electricity mix in Andalucía (Spain)," TOP: An Official Journal of the Spanish Society of Statistics and Operations Research, Springer;Sociedad de Estadística e Investigación Operativa, vol. 22(1), pages 109-127, April.
    9. Maciej Nowak & Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2022. "A trade-off multiobjective dynamic programming procedure and its application to project portfolio selection," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 311(2), pages 1155-1181, April.
    10. Josephine Gatti Schafer & Caleb T Gallemore, 2016. "Biases in multicriteria decision analysis: The case of environmental planning in Southern Nevada," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1652-1675, December.
    11. Krzysztof S. Targiel & Maciej Nowak & Tadeusz Trzaskalik, 2018. "Scheduling non-critical activities using multicriteria approach," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(3), pages 585-598, September.
    12. Thomas L. Saaty, 2013. "The Modern Science of Multicriteria Decision Making and Its Practical Applications: The AHP/ANP Approach," Operations Research, INFORMS, vol. 61(5), pages 1101-1118, October.
    13. Maciej Nowak, 2010. "Interactive Multicriteria Decision Aiding Under Risk—Methods and Applications," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 69-91, October.
    14. Hanyu Lu & Lufei Huang, 2021. "Optimization of Shore Power Deployment in Green Ports Considering Government Subsidies," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-14, February.
    15. José Manuel Naranjo Gómez, 2016. "Impacts on the Social Cohesion of Mainland Spain’s Future Motorway and High-Speed Rail Networks," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 8(7), pages 1-22, July.
    16. Nowak, Maciej, 2007. "Aspiration level approach in stochastic MCDM problems," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 177(3), pages 1626-1640, March.
    17. T Kainulainen & P Leskinen & P Korhonen & A Haara & T Hujala, 2009. "A statistical approach to assessing interval scale preferences in discrete choice problems," Journal of the Operational Research Society, Palgrave Macmillan;The OR Society, vol. 60(2), pages 252-258, February.
    18. Greco, Salvatore, 1997. "A new PCCA method: IDRA," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 98(3), pages 587-601, May.
    19. C. O. S. Sorzano & J. Vargas & G. Caffarena-Fernández & A. Iriarte, 2014. "Comparing scientific performance among equals," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 101(3), pages 1731-1745, December.
    20. Shih, Hsu-Shih, 2008. "Incremental analysis for MCDM with an application to group TOPSIS," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 186(2), pages 720-734, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Pianificazione del paesaggio; analisi multicriterio; gestione delle zone costiere;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • D81 - Microeconomics - - Information, Knowledge, and Uncertainty - - - Criteria for Decision-Making under Risk and Uncertainty
    • O21 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Development Planning and Policy - - - Planning Models; Planning Policy
    • R52 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - Regional Government Analysis - - - Land Use and Other Regulations

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:fan:scresc:v:html10.3280/scre2014-s01003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Stefania Rosato (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.francoangeli.it/riviste/sommario.aspx?IDRivista=103 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.