Multicriteria Analysis to Implement Actions Leading to Coastal Dune Restoration
Multicriteria Analysis to Implement Actions Leading to Coastal Dune Restoration
复制标题
实施沿海沙丘恢复行动的多标准分析
DOI：
10.1007/978-3-642-33445-0_19
复制
发表时间：
2013
影响因子：
2.1
通讯作者：
J. B. Gallego
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Debora Lithgow;M. L. Martínez;J. B. Gallego
本章利用层次分析法 (AHP) 以及由生态学家、地貌学家、人类学家和沿海沙丘恢复专家组成的多学科专家小组的贡献，探讨了影响海滩和沙丘恢复成功的变量。选择代表海滩-沙丘系统的标准时考虑了它们对生态恢复成功或失败的影响。考虑了三个层次：标准、子标准和指标。第一个标准包括四个标准（退化程度、对系统造成压力的因素、促进因素和有助于确定优先级的因素）。第二级有十个子标准：形态退化和系统碎片化；植被退化；内应力因素；外部压力因素；促进恢复的非生物因素；促进恢复的生物因素；存在任何类别风险的物种；靠近保护区；洪水发生率增加；面临风险的生态系统服务）。第三级由 38 个指标组成（例如，植被践踏造成的损害证据、游客压力、影响沉积物动态的基础设施、可用于恢复的繁殖体来源的接近程度等）。每个级别要素的相对重要性由专家小组计算。在 0 到 1 的范围内，最高权重 (0.37) 被分配给标准“促进者”。该术语指的是恢复所需的生物和非生物元素的存在。该标准还包括 12 项指标（先锋植物的可用性；存在耐受性的本地植物物种；空间的可用性、海岸相对于波浪的方向；风沙输送；沉积物大小；附近沉积物源的存在；改变风动力的基础设施的存在等）。最低权重（0.15）被分配给标准“有助于优先排序的要素”。该标准是指那些吸引公众关注以及为恢复特定地点而进行财政投资的人类优先考虑的要素，包括诸如靠近保护区、靠近文化遗址和旅游区等指标，以及可测量的生态系统服务，例如因飓风或海平面上升而面临消失风险的人类利益的存在、大量酒店以及洪水的发生。多标准分析对于做出复杂的决策非常有用，例如选择要恢复的海滩和沙丘。这是因为它允许以有序的方式解决问题，选择最具代表性的标准并分配权重。此外，使用这种分析使我们能够通过专家小组的贡献考虑一系列意见。纳入这样一个小组可以节省时间，同时使所做出的决定具有可信度。
This chapter explores the variables that can influence the success of beach and dune restoration, utilizing Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the contributions of a multidisciplinary panel of recognized experts that includes ecologists, geomorphologists, anthropologists, and specialists in the restoration of coastal dunes. The criteria selected to represent the beach–dune system were chosen taking into consideration their influence on the success or failure of ecological restoration. Three levels were considered: criteria, subcriteria, and indicators. The first consists of four criteria (degree of degradation, factors that cause stress to the system, facilitators and elements that assist prioritization). The second level has ten subcriteria: morphological degradation and system fragmentation; degradation of vegetation; internal stress factors; external stress factors; abiotic factors that facilitate restoration; biotic factors that facilitate restoration; presence of species in any category of risk; proximity to protected areas; increased occurrence of floods; ecosystem services at risk). The third level consists of 38 indicators (e.g., evidence of damage by trampling of vegetation, visitor pressure, infrastructure affecting sediment dynamics, proximity of sources of propagules that can be used in restoration, among others). The relative importance of the elements of each level was calculated by the panel of experts. In a range from 0 to 1, the highest weighting (0.37) was assigned to the criterion “facilitators”. This term refers to the existence of biotic and abiotic elements necessary for restoration to take place. This criterion also includes 12 indicators (availability of pioneer plants; presence of tolerant native plant species; availability of space, orientation of the coast with respect to the waves; aeolian transport; sediment size; presence of nearby sediment sources; presence of infrastructure that alters wind dynamics, among others). The lowest weighting (0.15) was assigned to the criterion “elements that assist prioritization”. This criterion refers to those elements that are priorities for mankind that attract public attention as well as financial investment for the restoration of a given site and includes indicators such as proximity to protected areas, proximity to cultural sites and tourist areas, as well as measured ecosystem services such as the presence of human interests that are at risk of disappearing because of hurricanes or under rising sea, an abundance of hotels, and the occurrence of floods. Multi-criteria analysis is useful for making complex decisions, such as the choice of beaches and dunes for restoration. This is because it allows the problem to be addressed in an orderly manner, chooses the most representative criteria as well as assigning weighting. Furthermore, the use of this analysis allowed us to take a range of opinions into account through the contributions of a panel of experts. Inclusion of such a panel saves time while giving credibility to the decisions taken.