Abstract
The land of Paggaio, Kavala, Greece although very rich, has been cultivated in ways that affected both local environment and economies disadvantageously giving rise to the crucial problem of strategic crop planning. However, because of the many actors involved, and of their conflicting interests, reaching a consensus about what the objectives of such a planning should be, is a complex and challenging task. So as a first, preparatory step for strategic crop planning, the interested parties should acquire a clear view about what are the differences in the preferences of the involved actors. In this chapter, we present the steps that we followed in order to execute an end-to-end process for a client that needed to unveil what are the criteria that guide the preferences of the actors and which actors converge (or diverge) the most, with respect to the evaluation on these criteria. Following a prescriptive approach (that assumes that a preference model exists), we sketched the relevant problem situation and problem formulation, constructed an evaluation model based on a multiple criteria technique, and eventually reached some recommendations. The case study we present in this work could help analysts to structure their own decision aid processes based on an established roadmap, as well as to become aware of the process pitfalls. Regarding the referenced case study, it showed that actors have strongly diverging preferences, so that it was not possible to discover a robust collective model. However, we were able to identify the points of major conflict in two criteria (environmental friendliness and economical performance) and amongst certain stakeholders.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Adamowicz W, Boxall P, Williams M, Louviere J (1998) Stated Preference Approaches for measuring passive use values: choice experiments and contingent valuation. Am J Agric Econ 80(1):64–75. doi:10.2307/3180269. doi: http://ajae.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/doi/10.2307/3180269
Asrat S, Yesuf M, Carlsson F, Wale E (2010) Farmers’ preferences for crop variety traits: lessons for on-farm conservation and technology adoption. Ecol Econ 69(12):2394–2401. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.07.006. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2010.07.006
Bohanec M, Messéan A, Scatasta S, Angevin F, Griffiths B, Krogh PH, Žnidaršič M, Džeroski S (2008) A qualitative multi-attribute model for economic and ecological assessment of genetically modified crops. Ecol Model 215(1–3):247–261. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.02.016. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2008.02.016
Bouyssou D, Marchant T, Pirlot M, Tsoukiàs A, Vincke P (2006) Evaluation and decision models with multiple criteria: stepping stones for the analyst. In: International series in operations research & management science, vol 86 Springer, New York
Carson RT, Louviere JJ (2011) A common nomenclature for stated preference elicitation approaches. Environ Resour Econ 49(4):539–559. doi:10.1007/s10640-010-9450-x. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10640-010-9450-x
Chetty S, Adewumi AO (2014) Comparison study of swarm intelligence techniques for the annual crop planning problem. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 18(2):258–268. doi:10.1109/TEVC.2013.2256427. http://ieeexplore.ieee.org/lpdocs/epic03/wrapper.htm?arnumber=6492247
Dai Z, Li Y (2013) A multistage irrigation water allocation model for agricultural land-use planning under uncertainty. Agric Water Manag 129:69–79. doi:10.1016/j.agwat.2013.07.013. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0378377413001947
de Groot R, Alkemade R, Braat L, Hein L, Willemen L (2010) Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making. Ecol Complex 7(3):260–272. doi:10.1016/j.ecocom.2009.10.006. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S1476945X09000968
Delias P, Matsatsinis N (2013) Multiple criteria decision aid and agents: Supporting effective resource federation in virtual organizations. In: Links, theory and applications. Wiley-Blackwell, New York, pp 273–284. doi:10.1002/9781118522516.ch11. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/9781118522516.ch11
Delias P, Manitsa P, Grigoroudis E, Matsatsinis N, Karasavvoglou A (2013) Robustness-oriented group decision support. a case from ecology economics. Procedia Technol 8:285–291, doi:10.1016/j.protcy.2013.11.038. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.protcy.2013.11.038
Dury J, Schaller N, Garcia F, Reynaud A, Bergez JE (2012) Models to support cropping plan and crop rotation decisions. A review. Agron Sustain Dev 32(2):567–580. doi:10.1007/s13593-011-0037-x. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s13593-011-0037-x
Gal PYL, Dugué P, Faure G, Novak S (2011) How does research address the design of innovative agricultural production systems at the farm level? a review. Agr Syst 104(9):714–728 doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2011.07.007. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2011.07.007
Janová J (2012) Crop planning optimization model: the validation and verification processes. Cen Eur J Oper Res 20(3):451–462, doi:10.1007/s10100-011-0205-8. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s10100-011-0205-8
Kassie M, Shiferaw B, Muricho G (2011) Agricultural technology, crop income, and poverty alleviation in Uganda. World Dev 39(10):1784–1795. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.023. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2011.04.023
Li J, Rodriguez D, Zhang D, Ma K (2015) Crop rotation model for contract farming with constraints on similar profits. Comput Electron Agric 119:12–18. doi:10.1016/j.compag.2015.10.002. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compag.2015.10.002
Manos B, Bournaris T, Chatzinikolaou P, Berbel J, Nikolov D (2013) Effects of CAP policy on farm household behaviour and social sustainability. Land Use Policy 31:166–181. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.12.012. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landusepol.2011.12.012
Morisio M, Tsoukiàs A (1997) IusWare: a methodology for the evaluation and selection of software products. IEE Proc - Softw Eng 144(3):162
Núñez M, Pfister S, Antón A, Muñoz P, Hellweg S, Koehler A, Rieradevall J (2013) Assessing the environmental impact of water consumption by energy crops grown in Spain: LCA of water for energy crops in Spain. J Ind Ecol 17(1):90–102. doi:10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00449.x. doi: http://doi.wiley.com/10.1111/j.1530-9290.2011.00449.x
Roy B (1993) Decision science or decision-aid science? Eur J Oper Res 66(2):184–203. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(93)90312-B. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/037722179390312B
Roy B, Damart S (2002) L’ analyse coûts-avantages, outil de concertation et de légitimation? Metropolis 108/109:7–16
Roy B, Słowiński R (2013) Questions guiding the choice of a multicriteria decision aiding method. EURO J Dec Process 1(1-2):69–97. doi:10.1007/s40070-013-0004-7. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s40070-013-0004-7
Sadok W, Angevin F, Bergez JÉ, Bockstaller C, Colomb B, Guichard L, Reau R, Doré T (2008) Ex ante assessment of the sustainability of alternative cropping systems: implications for using multi-criteria decision-aid methods. a review. Agron Sustain Dev 28(1):163–174, doi:10.1051/agro:2007043. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/agro:2007043
Siskos Y, Grigoroudis E, Matsatsinis N (2005) UTA methods. In: Multiple criteria decision analysis: state of the art surveys. International series in operations research & management science, vol 78. Springer, New York, pp 297–344
Stamelos I, Tsoukiàs A (2003) Software evaluation problem situations. Eur J Oper Res 145(2):273–286. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00534-9. http://linkinghub.elsevier.com/retrieve/pii/S0377221702005349
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Delias, P., Grigoroudis, E., Matsatsinis, N.F. (2018). Group Decision Support for Crop Planning: A Case Study to Guide the Process of Preferences Elicitation. In: Dias, L., Morton, A., Quigley, J. (eds) Elicitation. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol 261. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65052-4_21
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-65052-4_21
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-65051-7
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-65052-4
eBook Packages: Business and ManagementBusiness and Management (R0)