خ سينا ترجمه
10/11/1388
Decision support for spatially targeted livestock policies:
Diverse examples from Uganda and Thailand
Pierre J. Gerber a,*, Gerrit J. Carsjens b, Thanee Pak-uthai c, Timothy P. Robinson a
a Livestock Information, Sector Analysis and Policy Branch (AGAL), Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO),
Viale delle Terme di Caracalla, 00153 Rome, Italy
b Land Use Planning Group, Wageningen University, P.O. Box 47, 6700 AA Wageningen, The Netherlands
c Department of Livestock Development, Ministry of Agriculture and Co-operatives of Thailand, Rajethevee, 10400 Bangkok, Thailand
Received 4 August 2005; received in revised form 9 May 2007; accepted 21 May 2007
Available online 27 August 2007
Abstract
Public policies are needed to guide livestock sector’s changes along a path that is sustainable in economic, social and environmental
terms. These policies should include multiple development objectives and be adapted to location-specific contexts. Policy makers need
assistance in dealing with such complex decisions. Spatial information can be integrated in decision support tools to support policy making,
and is becoming increasingly available in the developing world. Spatial information, however, has seldom been used in livestock
sector policy formulation because policy makers generally do not have access to resources for spatial modelling. The objective of this
paper is to bridge this gap by proposing an approach to consolidating and analysing spatial information in the context of limited modelling
resources. Rooted in practical experience, a method is proposed that combines two multiple criteria decision-making techniques
(weighted linear combination and analytical hierarchical processes), parameterised in a participatory process and implemented in a GIS.
The method is tested in two different contexts: support to single objective decision-making for targeting trypanosomiasis control interventions
in Uganda, and support to multiple objective decision-making for spatial planning of livestock production development in Thailand.
The results show the advantages of such an approach, in terms of stakeholder involvement and practical application to support
decision-making, but also highlight two shortcomings: dependence on high quality data and uncertainty with regard to the decision rule.
While the former will be addressed as digital information becomes increasingly available, the latter, embedded in any decision-making
process, calls for thorough sensitivity analyses and careful scrutiny of results.
2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Multiple criteria decision-making; GIS; Zoning; Targeting; Decision support methods
1. Introduction
Worldwide, the livestock sector production is growing
faster than any other agricultural sector and undergoing
major changes (FAO, 2003). Concentrated in countries
with rapid economic growth, the rise in production is
mostly driven by middle-class urban consumers (Delgado
et al., 2002) and achieved through structural changes such
as vertical integration, growth in scale, geographical concentration
and a shift from ruminant to monogastric species;
and through technical innovations such as adoption
of improved breeds and feeding regimes, and better processing,
transport and cold chain infrastructures (Costales
et al., 2006). These transformations have a significant
impact on rural development and public goods, such as
natural resources and public health (Steinfeld et al., 2006;
de Haan et al., 2001).
Public policies are required to address these consequences
(Chopra et al., 2005; de Haan et al., 1998) and
thus guide livestock sector development along a sustainable
path. Such policies must take into consideration that
the interactions among livestock, public goods and rural
0308-521X/$ - see front matter 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.agsy.2007.05.004
* Corresponding author. Tel.: +39 06 570 56 217; fax: +39 06 570 55
749.
E-mail address: pierre.gerber@fao.org (P.J. Gerber).
www.elsevier.com/locate/agsy
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Agricultural Systems 96 (2008) 37–51
[نظرها]