Volume 7, Issue 2 (2019)                   ECOPERSIA 2019, 7(2): 115-123 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

KianiSadr M, Melhosseini Darani K, Golkarian H. Quantitative Zoning of Ecotourism Potential in Oshtorankouh Protected Area Using Delphi Method, Analytic Hierarchy Process, and Weighted Overlay Methods. ECOPERSIA. 2019; 7 (2) :115-123
URL: http://ecopersia.modares.ac.ir/article-24-18755-en.html
1- Department of the Environment, College of Basic Science, Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Hamedan, Iran , kianysadr@gmail.com
2- Environmental Sciences Department, Natural Resources & Environment Faculty, Malayer University, Malayer, Iran
3- Environmental Sciences Department, Agriculture & Natural Resources Faculty, Ahvaz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Ahvaz, Iran
Abstract:   (5391 Views)
Aims: Zoning is applied to achieve a scientific and appropriate management based on criteria to make possible the proper use of the resources.
Materials and Methods: Zoning of the areas in order to study potential, as an approach based on multi-criteria evaluation (MCE), prevents personalized high-handed management and leads to identify appropriate recreational spots according to their natural capacities. area, located in Lorestan province, has been recognized as a protected area since 1966. This study has introduced a quantitative, weighted, and native model and Delphi method this area by using Delphi questionnaire and hierarchical analysis in order to determine its potential. The layers of gradient, direction, land type, water, fault, residential areas, land coverage, and were by applying the weights resulted from AHP.
Findings: The final output is a map, in which zero has the lowest value and 5 is considered the highest value (0-100% efficiency). Only 2 hectares of this area gained a score of 5, and there was not any zero point in the region. The largest area has the score of 2 (40% efficiency), which includes more than 55% of the total area.
Conclusion: We are succeeded to determine the potential of Oshtorankouh, using the AHP, Delphi method, and weighting by GIS software. Combining different methods and quantifying effective criteria by using different maps the impact of personal opinions on management decisions and provide appropriate results in accordance the potential of the area.
Full-Text [PDF 699 kb]   (925 Downloads)    
Article Type: Original Research | Subject: Terrestrial Ecosystems
Received: 2018/04/9 | Accepted: 2019/02/6 | Published: 2019/04/15
* Corresponding Author Address: Hamedan Branch, Islamic Azad University, Professor Mousivand Boulevard, Islamic Azad University Street, Imam Khomeini Boulevard, Hamedan, Iran.

1. Bennett EL, Robinson JG. Hunting of wildlife in tropical forests - implications for biodiversity and forest peoples. Environ Dep Work Pap. 2000 Sep: 76. [Link]
2. Masoudi M, Jokar P. Land-use planning using a quantitative model and Geographic Information System (GIS) in Shiraz township, Iran. Ecopersia. 2015;3(2):959-74. [Link]
3. Trap P, Helles F. Multiple Criteria Decision Support Methods in Forest Management. J For Econ. 1995;1(3):273-306. [Link]
4. Makropoulos CK, Butler D. Spatial ordered weighted averaging: Incorporating spatially variable attitude towards risk in spatial multi-criteria decision-making. Environ Model Softw. 2006;21(1):69-84. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.envsoft.2004.10.010]
5. Nilsen P, Tayler G. A comparative analysis of protected area planning and management frameworks. In: Mc Cool SF, Cole DN. Proceedings - limits of acceptable change and related planning processes: Progress and future directions: From a workshop held at the University of Montana''s Lubrecht Experimental Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden UT: Rocky Mountain Research Station; 1997. pp. 49-57. [Link]
6. Mc Cool SF, Cole DN. Experiencing limits of acceptable change: Some thoughts after a decade of implementation. In: Mc Cool SF, Cole DN. Proceedings - limits of acceptable change and related planning processes: Progress and future directions: From a workshop held at the University of Montana''s Lubrecht Experimental Forest. Gen. Tech. Rep. INT-GTR-371. Ogden UT: Rocky Mountain Research Station; 1997. pp. 72-7. [Link]
7. Abasi S, Zare H, Hosseini SM, Pilehvar B. Study on flora, vegetation structure and chorology of plants in some part of protected area of Oshtorankooh, Lorestan Province, 2015. J Environ Sci Technol. 17(1):125-34. [Link]
8. Dalkey N, Helmer O. An experimental application of the Delphi method to the use of experts. Manag Sci. 1963;9(3):458-67. [Link] [DOI:10.1287/mnsc.9.3.458]
9. Anderson DH. Using the Delphi process to identify significant recreation research-based innovations. J Park Recreat Adm. 1993;11(1):25-36. [Link]
10. Meymandi Parizi S, Kazeminia A. Vulnerability zoning in Kerman city based on passive defense principles. J Land use Plan. 2015. 7(12):119-44. [Link]
11. Brown G, Koth B, Kreak G, Weber D. Managing Australia's protected areas: A review of visitor management models, frameworks and processes. Gold Coast: CRC for Sustainable Tourism; 2006. pp: 8-9. [Link]
12. Siegrist D. Sustainable tourism and large protected areas - analysis models and success criteria of a sustainable tourism management using the example of the Alps. Proceedings of The Second International Conference on Monitoring and Management of Visitor Flows in Recreational and Protected Areas, June 16-20, 2004, Rovaniemi, Finland. Vantaa: Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 2; 2004. p: 311-7. [Link]
13. Stein TV, Clark JK, Rickards JL. Assessing nature's role in ecotourism development in Florida: Perspectives of tourism professionals and government decision-makers. J Ecotour. 2003;2(3):155-72. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/14724040308668142]
14. Spenceley A. Managing sustainable nature-based tourism in Southern Africa: A practical assessment tool [Dissertation]. London: University of Greenwich; 2003. [Link]
15. Abidin ZZ. The identification of criteria and indicators for the sustainable management of ecotourism in Taman Negara national park, Malaysia: A Delphi consensus. Morgantown: West Virginia University; 1999. [Link]
16. Makhdoum M. Fundamental of land use planing. 1st Edition. Tehran: University of Tehran; 1994. pp: 64-88. [Persian] [Link]
17. Makhdoum M. Principles of land use planning. Tehran: University of Tehran; 2008. pp: 289. [Link]
18. Makhdoum M, Dehdar Dargahy M. Golestan national park zoning. J Environ Stud. 2002;28(29):71-7. [Persian] [Link]
19. Majnounian H. Evaluating environmental potential of lundville wildlife refuge. Ecology. 2001;27(27):23-33. [Persian] [Link]
20. Yavari AR, Bahraini SH. Organized planning with simple land zoning methods. Ecology. 2001;(27):79-97. [Persian] [Link]
21. Ahmadi Zadeh S. Identification and application of quantitative ecological models in the GIS environment (Case study: Qaré Tican Zavin) [Dissertation]. Tehran: Tarbiat Modares University; 2004. [Persian] [Link]
22. Ma J, Scott NR, De Gloria SD, Lembo AJ. Siting analysis of farm-based centralized anaerobic digester systems for distributed generation using GIS. Biomass Bioenergy. 2005;28(6):591-600. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.biombioe.2004.12.003]
23. Satty TL. Fundamentals of decision making and priority theory with the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Pittsburgh PA: RWS Publications; 1994. [Link]
24. Kangas J. Multiple-use planning of forest resources by using the analytic hierarchy process. Scand J For Res. 1992;7(1-4):259-68. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/02827589209382718]
25. Carver SJ. Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographic information system. Int J Geogr Inf Syst. 1991;5(3):321-9. [Link] [DOI:10.1080/02693799108927858]
26. Westman WE. Ecology impact assessment and environmental planning. New York: John Wiley and Sons; 1995. [Link]
27. Pugh C. The changing roles of self-help in housing and urban policies, 1950-1996: experience in developing countries. Third World Plan Rev. 1997;19(1):91. [Link] [DOI:10.3828/twpr.19.1.68535555251w7183]
28. Vangenot C. Supporting decision-making with alternative data representations. J Geogr Inf Decis Anal. 2001;5(2):66-82. [Link]
29. Saffari A, Jan Ahmadi M, Rayati Shovazi M. 2015. Site Selection for suitable flood spreadingand artificial feeding through hybrid, AHP-Fuzzy Model Case Study: (Bushkan Plain, Bushehr Province). J Manag Syst. 1(3):81-97. [Persian] [Link]
30. Wang Y, Li J, Fan Z, Wang X. Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedical Engineering (ICBBE 2008); 2008 May 16-18; Shanghai, China. New York: IEEE; 2008. [Link]
31. Ngai EWT, Chan EWC. Evaluation of knowledge management tools using AHP. Expert Syst Appl. 2005;29(4):889-99. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.eswa.2005.06.025]
32. Fry G, Tveit M, Ode Å, Velarde MJEi. 2009. The ecology of visual landscapes: Exploring the conceptual common ground of visual and ecological landscape indicators. Ecol Indic. 2009;9(5):933-47. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.ecolind.2008.11.008]
33. Naveh Z, Lieberman AS. Landscape ecology: Theory and application. New York: Springer-Verlag; 1984. p. 103. [Link]
34. Marinoni O. Implementation of the analytical hierarchy process with VBA in ArcGIS. Comput Geosci. 2004;30(6):637-46. [Link] [DOI:10.1016/j.cageo.2004.03.010]
35. Kianysalmi S, Yeganeh Dastjerdi P. Identifying the effective factors affecting sport tourism activities using multi-criteria decision making techniques (Case study: Chahar Mahal and Bakhtiari province). J Tour Dev. 2016;5(2):115-35. [Persian] [Link]
36. Yamani M, Yusefi F, Moradi A, Abbasi M, Barzkar M. Preparatory zoning using the ANP and AHP models for tourism development case study: Oshnaviyeh city. Sepehr. 2017;26(102):19-34. [Persian] [Link]
37. Kiani salmi S, Mousavi SH, Yeganeh Dastgerdi, P. Spatial planning and feasibility of areas susceptible to ecotourism with land use planning approach Case study: Chaharmahal & Bakhtiari Province. Sepehr. 2018;26(102):217-28. [Persian] [Link]
38. Bijhani A, Behzad A, Naderifar H. Ecotourism zone analysis using models of AHP, and TOPSIS (Case study: Watershed Siahrood, Rudbar, Gilan, Iran). J Geogr. 2018;8(1):93-103. [Persian] [Link]
39. Sojasi Qidari H, Roknoddin Eftekhari AR, Pourtaheri M. Zoning the eco-tourism potential of the urban hinterland by using integrated method of multi-criteria decision of TOPSIS and GIS. J Urban Ecol Res. 2014;2(4):41-56. [Persian] [Link]
40. Sharifi M. Identification and zoning of potential ecotourism of Shiraz city using fuzzy logic model. The First National Conference in Tourism and Nature Gathering of the Iran. 2012. p. 9. [Persian] [Link]
41. Mahdavi A, Niknejad M, Karami O. Multi-criteria evaluation of land for ecotourism development (Case study: Khorram-Abad country). Ecol Iran For. 2014;2(4):56-69. [Persian] [Link]
42. Shojaee M, Torab Ahmadi M, Monzavi M. Assessing the potential of areas usceptible to the development of nature tourism (Case study: Qom province). Geogr Plan Space Q J. 2013;3(9):65-82. [Persian] [Link]
43. Mahdavi A, Niknejad M, Karami O. 2014. Multi-criteria evaluation of land for ecotourism development (Case Study: Khorramabad Country). Ecol Iran Forest. 2015;2(4):56-69. [Persian] [Link]
44. Kumari S, Behera MD, Tewari HR. Identification of potential ecotourism sites in West district, Sikkim using geospatial tools. Trop Ecol. 2010;51(1):75-85. [Link]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.