J. For. Sci., 2014, 60(12):487-494 | DOI: 10.17221/65/2014-JFS

Selection of appropriate criteria in urban forestry (Case study: Isfahan city, Iran)Original Paper

Z. Mohammadi, S. Mohammadi Limaei
Faculty of Natural Resources, University of Guilan, Someh Sara, Iran

The aim of this study is to select appropriate criteria such as ecology, economy, social and aesthetic for plantation in Isfahan city, Iran. In order to do this research, 19 questionnaires were distributed among the experts at the study area in 2013. Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) technique as a multi-criteria decision making was used for evaluation of urban forestry at this research. Expert Choice software was used for analysis. The results showed that the ecological criterion has the highest weight for urban forestry at Isfahan city and the aesthetic criterion has the lowest priority for urban forestry at the study area. According to the judgments of the decision makers, results also showed that the large parks have the highest priority for urban forestry and street margins have the lowest priority for urban forestry and green space.

Keywords: AHP; multi-criteria decision making

Published: December 31, 2014  Show citation

ACS AIP APA ASA Harvard Chicago Chicago Notes IEEE ISO690 MLA NLM Turabian Vancouver
Mohammadi Z, Mohammadi Limaei S. Selection of appropriate criteria in urban forestry (Case study: Isfahan city, Iran). J. For. Sci. 2014;60(12):487-494. doi: 10.17221/65/2014-JFS.
Share...
Download citation
  • BibTeX (.bib)
  • Bookends (.ris)
  • EasyBib (.ris)
  • EndNote (.enw)
  • EndNote 8 (.xml)
  • ISI WoS (.isi)
  • Medlars (.medlars)
  • Mendeley (.ris)
  • MODS (.xml)
  • Papers (.ris)
  • RefWorks (.txt)
  • RefManager (.ris)
  • RIS (.ris)
  • MS Word (.xml)
  • Zotero (.ris)
    • Open full article

    References

    1. Anonymous (1990): Produced by Expert Choice, Inc. Pittsburgh, Expert Choice: 392.
    2. Alanbay O. (2005): ERP selection using expert choice software. In: Levy J. (ed.): Proceeding of International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process (ISAHP). Multi-criteria Decision Making. Honolulu, 8-10 July 2005. Washington DC, ISAHP: 1-10. Go to original source...
    3. Amjad M., Hemmasian Ettefagh M., Jahanbazi Goojani M. (2012): Review of mudies role on sustainability of Isfahan city. In: 6th International Symposium on Advances in Science and Technology SASTech. Kuala Lumpur, 21-25 March 2012. Kuala Lumpur, Khavaran Institute of Higher Education: 11-30.
    4. Bihamta Toosi N., Fakheran S., Soffianian A. (2012): Analysis of landscape pattern changes in Isfahan city during the last two decades. In: International Conference on Applied Life Sciences (ICALS2012). Konya, 10-12 September 2012. Konya, ISALS: 149-153.
    5. Bunruamkaew Kh., Murayama Y. (2011): Site Suitability Evaluation for Ecotourism Using GIS & AHP: A Case Study of Surat Thani Privince, Thailand. [Ph.D. Thesis.] Tsukuba, University of Tsukuba: 129. Go to original source...
    6. Chen N.L., Nie Y. (2007): Economic analyses of urban forest ecological value of Nanjing. Journal of Nanjing Forestry University (Natural Science Edition), 31: 129-133.
    7. Duhme F., Pauleit S. (1992): Nature protection programme for Munich. Landscape ecological frame concept. Georgra Pische Rundschau, 44: 554-561.
    8. Eastman J. R. (2003): IDRISI Kilimanjaro: Guide to GIS and Image Processing. Worcester, Clark Laboratories, Clark University: 328.
    9. Erkut E., Moran S.R. (1991): Locating obnoxious facilities in the public sector: an application of the hierarchy process to municipal landfill sitting decisions. Socio-economic Planning Sciences, 25: 89-102. Go to original source...
    10. Goepel K.D. (2013): Implementing the analytic hierarchy process as a standard method for multi criteria decision making in Corporate Enterprises - A new AHP Excel template with multiple inputs. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Kuala Lumpur, 20 June 2013. Kuala Lumpur, ISAHP: 1-10. Go to original source...
    11. ISFAHAN municipality (2014): Park and Green Space Organization of Isfahan. Available at http://www.isfahan.ir (accessed June, 2014).
    12. Jian X. (2009): Application of analytical hierarchy process in urban green space evaluation. Resource Development and Market, 25: 610-612.
    13. Karami S. (1999): Analysis of factors influencing in selecting species for green space creating on railway marginss (Case Study: Sadeghieh-Ekbatan subway). [MSc Thesis.] Tehran, Tehran University: 89.
    14. Kangas J., Pukkala T. (1992): A decision theoretic approach applied to goal programming of forest management. Silva Fennica, 26: 169-176. Go to original source...
    15. Konijnendijk C.C. (1999): Urban Forestry in Europe: A Comparative Study of Concepts, Policies and Planning for Forest Conservation, Management and Development in and Around Major European Cities. [Ph.D. Thesis.] Joensuu, University of Joensuu: 130.
    16. Konijnendijk C.C., Randrup T.B. (2002): Editorial. Urban Forestry and Urban Greening, 1: 1-4. Go to original source...
    17. Konijnendijk C.C., Nilsson K., Randrup T.B., Schipperijn J. (2005): Urban Forests and Trees. Heidelberg, Springer: 505. Go to original source...
    18. Kurttila M., Pesonen M., Kangas J., Kajanus M. (2000): Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis- a hybrid method and its application to a forestcertification case. Journal of Forest Policy and Economic, 1: 41-52. Go to original source...
    19. Liu C.F., Chang J., Tan Y.Y. (2009): Community structure evaluation of Shenyang's urban forest by AHP. Northern Horticulture, 6: 250-253.
    20. Mendoza G.A., Sprouse W. (1989): Forest planning and decision making under fuzzy environments: an overview and illustration. Journal of Forest Science, 35: 481-502. Go to original source...
    21. Mendoza G.A. (1997): Introduction to analytic hierarchy process: Theory and applications to natural resource management. In: ACSMrASPRS, American Congress on Surveying and MapWANG American Society for Photogrammetric and Remote Sensing. Seattle, Washington, Technical papers Seattle, Washington, Resource Technology: 130-139.
    22. Miller R.W. (1997): Urban Forestry Planning and Managing Urban Green Space. New Jersey, Prentice Hall: 440.
    23. Nowak D.J., Stein M.S., Ranlder P.B., Greenfield E.J., Comas S.J., Car M.A., Alig J.R. (2010): Sustaining America's Urban Trees and Forests: a Forest on the Edge Report. Newtown Square, USDA Forest Service, Northern Research Station: 27. Go to original source...
    24. Putrus P. (1990): Accounting for intangibles in integrated manufacturing (nonfinancial justification based on the analytical hierarchy process). Information Strategy, 6: 25-30.
    25. Rostami Shahraji T. (2003): Urban forestry management and observance some important problems in green space. Payame Sabz, 180: 26-28. (in Persian)
    26. Rostami Shahraji T., Shafiee S., Mohammadi Limaei S. (2011): Application of AHP for determining the appropriate species in urban forestry. In: Proceeding of 4th International Conference of Iranian Operation Research Society. Rasht, 18-19 May 2011. Rasht, University of Guilan: 248-249.
    27. Saaty T.L. (1977): A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology, 15: 234-281. Go to original source...
    28. Saaty T.L. (1980): The Analytic Hierarchy Process. New York, Mc Graw Hill: 287. Go to original source...
    29. Schmoldt D.L., Kangas J., Mendoza G.A. (2001) Basic principles of decision making in natural resources and the environment. In: Schmoldt D.L., Kangas J., Mendoza G.A., Pesonen M. (eds): The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making, Managing Forest Ecosystems Series. Dordrecht, Kluwer Academic Publishers: 1-15. Go to original source...
    30. Tyrvainen L., Pauleit S., Seeland K., Vries S.D. (2005): Function and benefits of urban forests and trees. In: Konijnendijk C.C., Nilsson K., Randrup T.B., Schipperijn J. (eds): In: Benefits and Uses of Urban Forests and Trees. Heidelberg, Springer: 81-114. Go to original source...
    31. Varesi H., Beikmohammadi H., Ghanbari S. (2010): Compassion of economical damages of Agriculcheral drought in Naein City with other townships in Isfahan (for 1378-1382 years). Geography and Environmental Planning Journal, 21: 21-44. (in Persian)
    32. Wang P., Ma L., Li K. (2006): Evaluation system of urban ecological environmental quality in Nanjing city. Chinese Journal of Ecology, Nanjing Forest University, 25: 60-63.
    33. Wolf K. (1998): Urban Forest Values: Economic Benefits of Trees in Cities. Washington DC, University of Washington College of Forest Resources: 29.
    34. Zahedi F. (1986): The analytic hierarchy process - a survey of the method and its applications. Interfaces, 16: 96-108. Go to original source...

    This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY NC 4.0), which permits non-comercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original publication is properly cited. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.


    Return to the content