IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0250167.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

An integrated approach of Ecological Footprint (EF) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in human ecology: A base for planning toward sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Mahsa Fatemi
  • Kurosh Rezaei-Moghaddam
  • Ezatollah Karami
  • Dariush Hayati
  • Mathis Wackernagel

Abstract

Environmental challenges to natural resources have been attributed to human behavior and traditional agricultural production techniques. Natural resource degradation in agriculture has always been a prime concern in agro ecological research and sustainability analysis. There are many techniques for assessing environmental performance; one of which, ecological footprint (EF), assesses human pressure on the environment and natural resources. The main purpose of this study was calculation of ecological indices including biocapacity (BC) and EF of rural areas of Fars province of Iran. The study was accomplished using survey and structured interviews consisting of three main questionnaires in two different steps. Different agricultural stakeholders, including farmers (for the first step) as well as the policymakers, extension managers and authorities (for the second step) were interviewed. Based on multi-stage stratified random sampling, 50 villages and 423 farmers were selected. Face validity and reliability of the questionnaires were assessed by a panel of specialists as well as conducting a pilot study, respectively. The paradigmatic perspectives of agricultural policy makers and managers (22 individuals) were also analyzed using another specific questionnaire by Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP). Findings revealed that most of the studied villages faced a critical environmental condition due to the results of ecological indicator which was calculated in the study. According to the four main components of human ecology (POET model) including Population, Organization, Environment and Technology, village groups that differed in terms of sustainability level also showed significantly differences due to population, social participation, use of green technologies and attitude towards diverse environmental management paradigms. The causal model also revealed that population, green technology, social participation and attitude toward frontier economics, which were in accordance with the elements of human ecology model, were the main factors affecting the ecological index. Finally, AHP results determined the dominant economic perspectives of agricultural authorities. A paradigm shift toward the comprehensive paradigm of eco-development plus consideration of the results of the ecological indicator calculation as the base of agricultural planning at the local level were recommended.

Suggested Citation

  • Mahsa Fatemi & Kurosh Rezaei-Moghaddam & Ezatollah Karami & Dariush Hayati & Mathis Wackernagel, 2021. "An integrated approach of Ecological Footprint (EF) and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in human ecology: A base for planning toward sustainability," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(4), pages 1-31, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0250167
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0250167
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250167
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0250167&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0250167?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Colby, Michael E., 1991. "Environmental management in development: the evolution of paradigms," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 3(3), pages 193-213, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Sharareh Pourebrahim & Mehrdad Hadipour & Zahra Emlaei & Hamidreza Heidari & Choo Ta Goh & Khai Ern Lee, 2023. "Analysis of Environmental Carrying Capacity Based on the Ecological Footprint for the Sustainable Development of Alborz, Iran," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(10), pages 1-19, May.
    2. Yingchang Li & Zhenzhen Liu & Gaifang Liu, 2023. "Evaluation of Tourism Ecological Security Based on Driving Force–Pressure–State–Influence–Response Framework and Analysis of Its Dynamic Evolution Characteristics and Driving Factors in Chinese Provin," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(18), pages 1-22, September.
    3. Yang Li & Jingjing Pei & Fang Zhang, 2023. "Comprehensive Ecological Planning and Evaluation of Towns from the Perspective of Sustainable Development," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(14), pages 1-18, July.

    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. Vasile EFROS & Gheorghe CHEIA, 2013. "Mountain Tourism Interconnections. Variation Of Mountain Tourist Flow In Suceava County," Revista de turism - studii si cercetari in turism / Journal of tourism - studies and research in tourism, "Stefan cel Mare" University of Suceava, Romania, Faculty of Economics and Public Administration - Economy, Business Administration and Tourism Department., vol. 16(16), pages 67-71, December.
    2. Samet Güner, 2018. "Evaluation of the evolution of green management with a Kuhnian perspective," Business Research, Springer;German Academic Association for Business Research, vol. 11(2), pages 309-328, September.
    3. Denise Fischer & Malte Brettel & René Mauer, 2020. "The Three Dimensions of Sustainability: A Delicate Balancing Act for Entrepreneurs Made More Complex by Stakeholder Expectations," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 87-106, April.
    4. Dirk Clercq & Narongsak Thongpapanl & Maxim Voronov, 2018. "Sustainability in the Face of Institutional Adversity: Market Turbulence, Network Embeddedness, and Innovative Orientation," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 148(2), pages 437-455, March.
    5. Katharina Biely & Dries Maes & Steven Van Passel, 2018. "Market Power Extended: From Foucault to Meadows," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-23, August.
    6. Ahi, Payman & Searcy, Cory & Jaber, Mohamad Y., 2018. "A Quantitative Approach for Assessing Sustainability Performance of Corporations," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 152(C), pages 336-346.
    7. Emilia Faria & Armando Caldeira-Pires & Cristiane Barreto, 2021. "Social, Economic, and Institutional Configurations of the Industrial Symbiosis Process: A Comparative Analysis of the Literature and a Proposed Theoretical and Analytical Framework," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(13), pages 1-25, June.
    8. Colin Higgins & Wendy Stubbs & Markus Milne, 2018. "Is Sustainability Reporting Becoming Institutionalised? The Role of an Issues-Based Field," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 147(2), pages 309-326, January.
    9. Letycja Sołoducho-Pelc & Adam Sulich, 2022. "Natural Environment Protection Strategies and Green Management Style: Literature Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(17), pages 1-25, August.
    10. Brodt, Sonja & Klonsky, Karen & Tourte, Laura, 2006. "Farmer goals and management styles: Implications for advancing biologically based agriculture," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 89(1), pages 90-105, July.
    11. Minna Halme, 1996. "Shifting Environmental Management Paradigms In Two Finnish Paper Facilities: A Broader View Of Institutional Theory," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 5(2), pages 94-105, June.
    12. Rifaat Abdel Wahaab, 2003. "Sustainable Development and Environmental Impact Assessment in Egypt: Historical Assessment," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 23(1), pages 49-70, March.
    13. repec:ilo:ilowps:292066 is not listed on IDEAS
    14. Christine Byrch & Kate Kearins & Markus Milne & Richard Morgan, 2007. "Sustainable “what”? A cognitive approach to understanding sustainable development," Qualitative Research in Accounting & Management, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 4(1), pages 26-52, March.
    15. Annik Magerholm Fet & Haley Knudson, 2021. "An Approach to Sustainability Management across Systemic Levels: The Capacity-Building in Sustainability and Environmental Management Model (CapSEM-Model)," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-13, April.
    16. Rachid M Zeffane & Michael J Polonsky & Patrick Medley, 1994. "Corporate environmental commitment: Developing the operational concept," Business Strategy and the Environment, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 3(4), pages 17-28.
    17. Markus J. Milne & Helen Tregidga & Sara Walton, 2009. "Words not actions! The ideological role of sustainable development reporting," Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 22(8), pages 1211-1257, October.
    18. Yi Zhang & Patrick Sik-Wah Fong & Daniel Yamoah Agyemang, 2021. "What Should Be Focused on When Digital Transformation Hits Industries? Literature Review of Business Management Adaptability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(23), pages 1-30, December.
    19. Édgard Moncayo Jiménez, 2003. "Nuevas teorías y enfoques conceptuales sobre el desarrollo regional: ¿hacia un nuevo paradigma?," Revista de Economía Institucional, Universidad Externado de Colombia - Facultad de Economía, vol. 5(8), pages 32-65, January-J.
    20. Janssen, Marco & Rotmans, Jan, 1995. "Allocation of fossil CO2 emission rights quantifying cultural perspectives," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 65-79, April.
    21. Maripaz Muñoz Prieto, 2020. "Legislation, Regulations, and Reflections on Environmental Accounting as a Reflection of the Incorporation of Social Responsibility in Companies," Laws, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-19, June.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0250167. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.