IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/lauspo/v88y2019ics0264837718303594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic analysis of land use changes in forests and rangelands: Developing conservation strategies

Author

Listed:
  • Jahanifar, Komeil
  • Amirnejad, Hamid
  • Azadi, Hossein
  • Adenle, Ademola A.
  • Scheffran, Jürgen

Abstract

Forests and rangelands are economically and environmentally important due to the production of goods and ecosystem services, and any changes in their nature requires a comprehensive evaluation and analysis. The objectives of this study include: a) conducting a cost-benefit analysis of land use change in the forests and rangelands of the Caspian vegetative area with regard to the environmental costs along with other costs and benefits, b) estimating the environmental damage of land use change, and c) developing appropriate strategies for the conservation of the forests and rangelands. The value of costs and benefits of the change was calculated from 2005 to 2016 using the average annual inflation rate up to 2035. The results of the evaluation model show that among the 6 scenarios of land use change, 4 scenarios are completely economically non-viable and two scenarios (forest and rangeland change to residential) are viable with regard to environmental considerations. Moreover, during this period, the change of forest and rangeland for other uses were respectively 43,732 and 33,466 ha. Accordingly, considering the average annual value of hectares of forest and rangeland in terms of producing goods and ecological services, the loss incurred was about 334 and 160 million USD.

Suggested Citation

  • Jahanifar, Komeil & Amirnejad, Hamid & Azadi, Hossein & Adenle, Ademola A. & Scheffran, Jürgen, 2019. "Economic analysis of land use changes in forests and rangelands: Developing conservation strategies," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:lauspo:v:88:y:2019:i:c:s0264837718303594
    DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.022
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0264837718303594
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.landusepol.2019.05.022?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
    ---><---

    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. Kurttila, Mikko & Pesonen, Mauno & Kangas, Jyrki & Kajanus, Miika, 2000. "Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis -- a hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 41-52, May.
    2. Saaty, Thomas L., 1990. "How to make a decision: The analytic hierarchy process," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 48(1), pages 9-26, September.
    3. Cuthbert, J.R. & Cuthbert, M., 2012. "Why IRR is an inadequate indicator of costs and returns in relation to PFI schemes," CRITICAL PERSPECTIVES ON ACCOUNTING, Elsevier, vol. 23(6), pages 420-433.
    4. Nick Hanley, 2001. "Cost — Benefit Analysis and Environmental Policymaking," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 19(1), pages 103-118, February.
    5. Amirnejad, Hamid & Khalilian, Sadegh & Assareh, Mohammad H. & Ahmadian, Majid, 2006. "Estimating the existence value of north forests of Iran by using a contingent valuation method," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(4), pages 665-675, July.
    6. Shrestha, Ram K. & Alavalapati, Janaki R. R. & Kalmbacher, Robert S., 2004. "Exploring the potential for silvopasture adoption in south-central Florida: an application of SWOT-AHP method," Agricultural Systems, Elsevier, vol. 81(3), pages 185-199, September.
    7. Farley, Joshua, 2012. "Ecosystem services: The economics debate," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 1(1), pages 40-49.
    8. Joubert, Alison R. & Leiman, Anthony & de Klerk, Helen M. & Katua, Stephen & Aggenbach, J. Coenrad, 1997. "Fynbos (fine bush) vegetation and the supply of water: a comparison of multi-criteria decision analysis and cost-benefit analysis," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 123-140, August.
    9. Yafei Li & Gaohuan Liu, 2017. "Characterizing Spatiotemporal Pattern of Land Use Change and Its Driving Force Based on GIS and Landscape Analysis Techniques in Tianjin during 2000–2015," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(6), pages 1-26, May.
    10. Chang, Da-Yong, 1996. "Applications of the extent analysis method on fuzzy AHP," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 649-655, December.
    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. Pan, Ying & Wu, Junxi & Zhang, Yanjie & Zhang, Xianzhou & Yu, Chengqun, 2021. "Simultaneous enhancement of ecosystem services and poverty reduction through adjustments to subsidy policies relating to grassland use in Tibet, China," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 48(C).
    2. Jahanifar, Komeil & Amirnejad, Hamid & Mojaverian, Seyed Mojtaba & Azadi, Hossein, 2020. "Land use change drivers in the Hyrcanian Vegetation Area: Dynamic simultaneous equations system with panel data approach," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    3. Siyu Zhang & Weiyan Hu & Liejia Huang & Hongjie Du, 2019. "Exploring the Effectiveness of Multifunctional Cultivated Land Protection Linking Supply to Demand in Value Engineering Theory: Evidence from Wuhan Metropolitan Area," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(22), pages 1-18, November.
    4. D'Agata, Alessia & Alaimo, Leonardo Salvatore & Cudlín, Pavel & Salvati, Luca, 2023. "Easy come, easy go: Short-term land-use dynamics vis à vis regional economic downturns," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 88(C).
    5. Jawad Ghafoor & Marie Anne Eurie Forio & Peter L. M. Goethals, 2022. "Spatially Explicit River Basin Models for Cost-Benefit Analyses to Optimize Land Use," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-16, 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. Saarikoski, Heli & Mustajoki, Jyri & Barton, David N. & Geneletti, Davide & Langemeyer, Johannes & Gomez-Baggethun, Erik & Marttunen, Mika & Antunes, Paula & Keune, Hans & Santos, Rui, 2016. "Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis and Cost-Benefit Analysis: Comparing alternative frameworks for integrated valuation of ecosystem services," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 22(PB), pages 238-249.
    2. Madjid Tavana & Mariya Sodenkamp & Leena Suhl, 2010. "A soft multi-criteria decision analysis model with application to the European Union enlargement," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 181(1), pages 393-421, December.
    3. Ustaoglu, E. & Aydınoglu, A.C., 2020. "Suitability evaluation of urban construction land in Pendik district of Istanbul, Turkey," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    4. Vassiliki Kazana & Angelos Kazaklis & Dimitrios Raptis & Christos Stamatiou, 2020. "A combined multi-criteria approach to assess forest management sustainability: an application to the forests of Eastern Macedonia & Thrace Region in Greece," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 294(1), pages 321-343, November.
    5. Çağlar Kıvanç Kaymaz & Salih Birinci & Yusuf Kızılkan, 2022. "Sustainable development goals assessment of Erzurum province with SWOT-AHP analysis," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(3), pages 2986-3012, March.
    6. Nermin Kişi, 2019. "A Strategic Approach to Sustainable Tourism Development Using the A’WOT Hybrid Method: A Case Study of Zonguldak, Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(4), pages 1-19, February.
    7. Tahseen, Samiha & Karney, Bryan, 2017. "Opportunities for increased hydropower diversion at Niagara: An sSWOT analysis," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 757-770.
    8. Li, Chengjiang & Negnevitsky, Michael & Wang, Xiaolin, 2020. "Prospective assessment of methanol vehicles in China using FANP-SWOT analysis," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 60-75.
    9. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    10. Grošelj, Petra & Hodges, Donald G. & Zadnik Stirn, Lidija, 2016. "Participatory and multi-criteria analysis for forest (ecosystem) management: A case study of Pohorje, Slovenia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 80-86.
    11. Sepehr Ghazinoory & Mansoureh Abdi & Mandana Azadegan-Mehr, 2010. "Swot Methodology: A State-of-the-Art Review for the Past, A Framework for the Future," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(1), pages 24-48, November.
    12. Zelin Liu & Xiyan Duan & Hongling Cheng & Zhaoran Liu & Ping Li & Yang Zhang, 2023. "Empowering High-Quality Development of the Chinese Sports Education Market in Light of the “Double Reduction” Policy: A Hybrid SWOT-AHP Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(3), pages 1-18, January.
    13. Syed Hammad Mian & Bashir Salah & Wadea Ameen & Khaja Moiduddin & Hisham Alkhalefah, 2020. "Adapting Universities for Sustainability Education in Industry 4.0: Channel of Challenges and Opportunities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-33, July.
    14. Chanthawong, Anuman & Dhakal, Shobhakar, 2016. "Stakeholders' perceptions on challenges and opportunities for biodiesel and bioethanol policy development in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C), pages 189-206.
    15. Panagiotis K. Marhavilas & Michael G. Tegas & Georgios K. Koulinas & Dimitrios E. Koulouriotis, 2020. "A Joint Stochastic/Deterministic Process with Multi-Objective Decision Making Risk-Assessment Framework for Sustainable Constructions Engineering Projects—A Case Study," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-21, May.
    16. Ilić, Damir & Milošević, Isidora & Ilić-Kosanović, Tatjana, 2022. "Application of Unmanned Aircraft Systems for smart city transformation: Case study Belgrade," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 176(C).
    17. Ali Azarnivand & Mohammad Ebrahim Banihabib, 2017. "A Multi-level Strategic Group Decision Making for Understanding and Analysis of Sustainable Watershed Planning in Response to Environmental Perplexities," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 26(3), pages 629-648, May.
    18. Shang, Delei & Yin, Guangzhi & Li, Xiaoshuang & Li, Yaoji & Jiang, Changbao & Kang, Xiangtao & Liu, Chao & Zhang, Chi, 2015. "Analysis for Green Mine (phosphate) performance of China: An evaluation index system," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(P2), pages 71-84.
    19. PrasannaVenkatesan, S. & Goh, M., 2016. "Multi-objective supplier selection and order allocation under disruption risk," Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Elsevier, vol. 95(C), pages 124-142.
    20. Uddin, Mohammad Nizam & Hossain, Mohammad Mosharraf & Chen, Yong & Siriwong, Wapakorn & Boonyanuphap, Jaruntorn, 2019. "Stakeholders' perception on indigenous community-based management of village common forests in Chittagong hill tracts, Bangladesh," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 100(C), pages 102-112.

    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:eee:lauspo:v:88:y:2019:i:c:s0264837718303594. 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: Joice Jiang (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.journals.elsevier.com/land-use-policy .

    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.