Sustainable planning for a coastal wetland system with an integrated ANP and DPSIR model for conflict resolution

A Hybrid Approach Using Fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS Assessing Environmental Conflicts in the Titan Mining Industry along Central Coast Vietnam

“…The General Algebraic Modelling System (GAMS) is applied to analyze coastal land conflicts [25]. The Analytic Network Process (ANP) is combined with the Driver-Pressure-State-Impact-Response (DPSIR) model to address conflict [26]. Applying multiple-criteria decision-making (MCDM) to environmental decision-making allows defining optimal specifications to be applied to environmental conflicts.…”

A participatory multicriteria approach to evaluate strategic projects for local sustainable development.

“…In relation to SD, ANP has the capability to include the three pillars of SD (environmental, social and economic) together with other relevant and diverse factors such as technical or legal issues (Bottero and Mondini 2008;Chuang et al 2018;Wang and Zeng 2010). Hence, it portrays a more realistic representation of problems by prioritising not only elements but also groups of elements, which is often necessary for solving problems on the ground (Ghajar and Najafi 2012;Peris et al 2013;Pourebrahim et al 2011;Shehada et al 2015).…”

“…Regarding handling of stakeholders, a considerable number of authors expressed the idea that it allows all stakeholder's opinions, requirements and interests to be considered (Bottero and Mondini 2008;Isaacs et al 2008;Šijanec et al 2014), integrates experts' opinions and knowledge (Aminu et al 2017;Chen and Khumpaisal 2009;Molinos-Senante et al 2015; as well as bringing the possibility of performing group decision sessions (Palmisano et al 2016). It also facilitates stakeholders gaining a better understanding of the problem, learning and increasing their awareness about it (Bottero and Ferretti 2010a;Chuang et al 2018;García-Melón et al 2012)…”

“…However, there were some exceptions. 28 experts (Pourebrahim et al 2010(Pourebrahim et al , 2011; 29 (Molinos-Senante et al 2015); 35 (Chuang et al 2018); 45 were divided into three groups of 15 experts each (Chen and Tzeng 2010); 75 answered questionnaires (Ha et al 2011); 54 (Dezhi et al 2016); and 60 participants were divided into four categories of stakeholders (Palmisano et al 2016).…”

“…Models are considered a suitable framework to deal with decision problems (Bottero and Mondini 2008;Chen and Tzeng 2010;Ghajar and Najafi 2012). It is a particularly valuable tool for planners (Wey et al 2016), allowing them more flexibility to craft policies and recommend policy directions (Chuang et al 2018;Persada et al 2018;Sayyadi and Awasthi 2018;, as well as formulating efficient plans at strategic and tactical levels (Agarwal et al 2013), and designing different assessment models. The procedure is easily adaptable to many cases for example to: i) evaluate several potential scenarios simultaneously (Grošelj et al 2016); ii) develop appropriate ex-ante and ex-post enquiries and evaluations of projects (Dragoi 2018;Molinos-Senante et al 2015); iii) support the selection of the most appropriate technology (Molinos-Senante et al 2015); iv) develop spatial analysis; or v) use land quality indicators properly (Ferretti et al 2014 Despite the extension of questionnaires, in some cases, participants considered that they were neither difficult nor tedious to fill in.…”