IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/endesu/v26y2024i1d10.1007_s10668-022-02787-5.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Suitable site selection by using full consistency method (FUCOM): a case study for maize cultivation in northwest Turkey

Author

Listed:
  • Timuçin Everest

    (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University)

  • Gönül Selin Savaşkan

    (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University)

  • Aykut Or

    (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University)

  • Hasan Özcan

    (Çanakkale Onsekiz Mart University)

Abstract

The agricultural land evaluation procedure is a valuable guide for growing plants where they are best suitable, and it has a critical role in actualizing sustainable plans for providing food security for the growing population. In agricultural land suitability analysis, different multi-criteria decision-making methods are applied. The main objective of this study is to introduce the potential usage of a new multi-criteria decision-making method the Full Consistency Method (FUCOM) in agricultural land suitability analysis. The study was carried out in the northern part of the Karamenderes plain in NW Turkey. Nine land characteristics (soil texture, soil depth, organic matter content, electrical conductivity, pH, slope, drainage, CaCO3%, and cation exchange capacity) were used for the land evaluation study. The weighting values of the land characteristics were calculated by the FUCOM. According to the results, 223 ha (6.26%) were highly suitable, 2650 ha (74.40%) were moderately suitable, 508 ha (14.26%) were marginally suitable, and 181 ha (5.08%) were not suitable for maize cultivation. The weighted values of the parameters were also tested with Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Best-Worst Method (BWM). There is a general compatibility between the methodologies. The data obtained from these methods showed that analysis consists of a very positive relationship with each other. The comparisons of these methodologies showed that FUCOM’s prioritization order simplicity in parameter weighting and ability to reduce the processing intensity would provide a significant contribution and advantage to the land evaluation experts and planners. It is recommended that the Full Consistent Method could be reliably used in agricultural land suitability analysis.

Suggested Citation

  • Timuçin Everest & Gönül Selin Savaşkan & Aykut Or & Hasan Özcan, 2024. "Suitable site selection by using full consistency method (FUCOM): a case study for maize cultivation in northwest Turkey," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(1), pages 1831-1850, January.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02787-5
    DOI: 10.1007/s10668-022-02787-5
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10668-022-02787-5
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10668-022-02787-5?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. J. M. Moreno-Jiménez & J. Aguarón & M. T. Escobar, 2008. "The Core of Consistency in AHP-Group Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 17(3), pages 249-265, May.
    2. A. Mendas & A. Mebrek & Z. Mekranfar, 2021. "Comparison between two multicriteria methods for assessing land suitability for agriculture: application in the area of Mleta in western part of Algeria," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 23(6), pages 9076-9089, June.
    3. Kheybari, Siamak & Javdanmehr, Mahsa & Rezaie, Fariba Mahdi & Rezaei, Jafar, 2021. "Corn cultivation location selection for bioethanol production: An application of BWM and extended PROMETHEE II," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 228(C).
    4. Qingpeng Cao & Moses Olabhele Esangbedo & Sijun Bai & Caroline Olufunke Esangbedo, 2019. "Grey SWARA-FUCOM Weighting Method for Contractor Selection MCDM Problem: A Case Study of Floating Solar Panel Energy System Installation," Energies, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-30, June.
    5. Maryam Akbari & Sarita Gajbhiye Meshram & R. S Krishna & Biswajeet Pradhan & Sameer Shadeed & Khaled Mohamed Khedher & Mehdi Sepehri & Ali Reza Ildoromi & Fereshteh Alimerzaei & Fariba Darabi, 2021. "Identification of the Groundwater Potential Recharge Zones Using MCDM Models: Full Consistency Method (FUCOM), Best Worst Method (BWM) and Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP)," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 35(14), pages 4727-4745, November.
    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. Toly Chen, 2021. "A diversified AHP-tree approach for multiple-criteria supplier selection," Computational Management Science, Springer, vol. 18(4), pages 431-453, October.
    2. Dimple & Pradeep Kumar Singh & Mahesh Kothari & Kamal Kishore Yadav & Sita Ram Bhakar, 2024. "Multi-criteria decision analysis for groundwater potential zones delineation using geospatial tools and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Nand Samand Catchment, Rajasthan, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 26(6), pages 14003-14037, June.
    3. Zhang, Hengjie & Dong, Yucheng & Chiclana, Francisco & Yu, Shui, 2019. "Consensus efficiency in group decision making: A comprehensive comparative study and its optimal design," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(2), pages 580-598.
    4. Gülay Demir & Milanko Damjanović & Boško Matović & Radoje Vujadinović, 2022. "Toward Sustainable Urban Mobility by Using Fuzzy-FUCOM and Fuzzy-CoCoSo Methods: The Case of the SUMP Podgorica," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-27, April.
    5. Wu, Qun & Liu, Xinwang & Zhou, Ligang & Qin, Jindong & Rezaei, Jafar, 2024. "An analytical framework for the best–worst method," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 123(C).
    6. Carlos Ramos & Zita Vale & Peter Palensky & Hiroaki Nishi, 2021. "Sustainable Energy Consumption," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-3, October.
    7. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2016. "The precise consistency consensus matrix in a local AHP-group decision making context," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 245(1), pages 245-259, October.
    8. Siamak Kheybari & Mohammad Reza Mehrpour & Paul Bauer & Alessio Ishizaka, 2024. "How Can Risk-Averse and Risk-Taking Approaches be Considered in a Group Multi-Criteria Decision-Making Problem?," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 33(4), pages 883-909, August.
    9. Adis Puška & Željko Stević & Dragan Pamučar, 2022. "Evaluation and selection of healthcare waste incinerators using extended sustainability criteria and multi-criteria analysis methods," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 24(9), pages 11195-11225, September.
    10. Min-Yuan Cheng & Shu-Hua Yeh & Woei-Chyi Chang, 2020. "Multi-Criteria Decision Making of Contractor Selection in Mass Rapid Transit Station Development Using Bayesian Fuzzy Prospect Model," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(11), pages 1-32, June.
    11. Manuel Salvador & Alfredo Altuzarra & Pilar Gargallo & José María Moreno-Jiménez, 2015. "A Bayesian Approach to Maximising Inner Compatibility in AHP-Systemic Decision Making," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(4), pages 655-673, July.
    12. Akhtar Veisi & Korous Khoshbakht & Hadi Veisi & Reza Mirzaei Talarposhti & Reza Haghparast Tanha, 2024. "Integrating farmers’ and experts’ perspectives for soil health-informed decision-making in conservation agriculture systems," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 44(2), pages 199-214, June.
    13. Juan Aguarón & María Teresa Escobar & José María Moreno-Jiménez & Alberto Turón, 2020. "The Triads Geometric Consistency Index in AHP-Pairwise Comparison Matrices," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 8(6), pages 1-17, June.
    14. Priyanka Majumder & Arnab Paul & Pratik Saha & Mrinmoy Majumder & Dayarnab Baidya & Dhritiman Saha, 2023. "Trapezoidal fuzzy BWM-TOPSIS approach and application on water resources," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(3), pages 2648-2669, March.
    15. Hana Ayadi & Nadia Hamani & Lyes Kermad & Mounir Benaissa, 2021. "Novel Fuzzy Composite Indicators for Locating a Logistics Platform under Sustainability Perspectives," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(7), pages 1-37, April.
    16. Wenqi Liu & Hengjie Zhang & Haiming Liang & Cong-cong Li & Yucheng Dong, 2022. "Managing Consistency and Consensus Issues in Group Decision-Making with Self-Confident Additive Preference Relations and Without Feedback: A Nonlinear Optimization Method," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 31(1), pages 213-240, February.
    17. Mevlut Uyan & Jarosław Janus & Ela Ertunç, 2023. "Land Use Suitability Model for Grapevine ( Vitis vinifera L.) Cultivation Using the Best Worst Method: A Case Study from Ankara/Türkiye," Agriculture, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-20, August.
    18. Subham Roy & Nimai Singha & Arghadeep Bose & Debanjan Basak & Indrajit Roy Chowdhury, 2023. "Multi-influencing factor (MIF) and RS–GIS-based determination of agriculture site suitability for achieving sustainable development of Sub-Himalayan region, India," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(7), pages 7101-7133, July.
    19. Gao, Jing & Wang, Chao & Wang, Zhanwu & Lin, Jin & Zhang, Runkai & Wu, Xin & Xu, Guangyin & Wang, Zhenfeng, 2024. "Site selection decision for biomass cogeneration projects from a sustainable perspective: A case study of China," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 286(C).
    20. Virgilio López-Morales & Joel Suárez-Cansino, 2017. "Reliable Intervals Method in Decision-Based Support Models for Group Decision-Making," International Journal of Information Technology & Decision Making (IJITDM), World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., vol. 16(01), pages 183-204, January.

    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:spr:endesu:v:26:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1007_s10668-022-02787-5. 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: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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.