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

Mahsa Fatemi,Mathis Wackernagel,Dariush Hayati,Kurosh Rezaei-Moghaddam,Ezatollah Karami,László Vasa

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0250167

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.

Highlights

All countries face difficult economic and environmental trade-off issues associated with agriculture in rural areas [1]
A parallel stream of work has elaborated a variety of landscape analysis, planning and management paradigms and strategies to address some of these challenges [6, 7]
The results of the calculations of BC and ecological footprint (EF) of 50 studied villages are shown in Table 1, since the accounting of these two parameters and the comparison of different villages in terms of BC and EF was the main purpose of the study with the stated goal to determine the sustainability situation of the studied regions

Summary

Introduction

All countries face difficult economic and environmental trade-off issues associated with agriculture in rural areas [1]. Much of this work has highlighted the scale and severity of agricultural impacts on ecological systems, as well as the challenge of designing management paradigms and strategies to meet ecosystem services in the context of limited resources and widespread ecosystem degradation [5]. The paradigm of frontier economics prevailed in most countries This paradigm’s concerns about natural resource exhaustion are hard to rationalize from the point of view of economics. In theory and in practice, the economy became disembodied from nature In this “man over nature” worldview, nature has been perceived as a body of resources and natural forces which can be channeled and reshaped by science and technology to provide economic growth [8, 9]. Relying on the idea of nature as resource means that nature’s primary purpose is to service unfettered economic growth [11]

Objectives

Results

Conclusion