Tuesday , October 23 2018

A Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework
for Fish Farms

Constanţa Zoie RADULESCU1, Magdalena Turek RAHOVEANU2
1 I C I Bucharest
(National Institute for R & D in Informatics)
8-10 Averescu Blvd.
011455 Bucharest 1, Romania
radulescu@ici.ro
2 Institute for Agricultural Economics and Rural Development
Bd. Marasti nr. 61, Bucharest 1, RO-011464, Romania
mturek2003@yahoo.com

Abstract: This paper presents a multi-criteria evaluation framework which integrates the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) methods. This approach takes into consideration subjective judgments of the decision makers. The criteria weights are calculated by using the AHP method. Subsequently, rankings of the alternatives are determined by the SAW method. Our multi-criteria evaluation framework is used for evaluating the performance of a fish farm, called Malina, located near the villages Sendreni and Smardan, Galati county, Romania. The analysis ranks the performance of the fish farm over a period of seven years, so the output is a trend over time reflecting the progress of the fish farm. The proposed framework enables the decision makers to better understand the whole evaluation process. It provides a more accurate, effective, and systematic evaluation tool.

Keywords: evaluation framework, multi-criteria model, AHP, SAW, fish farm.

>>Full text
CITE THIS PAPER AS:
Constanţa Zoie RADULESCU, Magdalena Turek RAHOVEANU, A Multi-Criteria Evaluation Framework for Fish Farms, Studies in Informatics and Control, ISSN 1220-1766, vol. 20 (2), pp. 181-186, 2011.

1. Introduction

Legislation requires that fisheries should be managed according to the principles of ecologically sustainable development. This imposes a complex set of potentially conflicting, multiple objectives. Primary considerations in fisheries management are: (i) sustainability of the resource base, (ii) economic viability and (iii) equity in access to the resource.

One of the reasons of management failure in fisheries is the conflict between ecological constraints and social and economic priorities, the latter often having priority over resource conservation. Moreover, fisheries management issues (stock evaluation, recruitment process, catches, eco-systemic effects, etc.) are highly marked by uncertainty. An important issue is thus to determine management procedures that give acceptable results with respect to the sustainability objectives while being robust to uncertainties [11], [12].

In this paper, we present a multi-criteria evaluation framework which integrates the Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) and the Simple Additive Weighting (SAW) methods. This approach takes into consideration subjective judgments of the decision makers. The criteria weights are calculated by using the AHP method. Then rankings of the alternatives are determined by the SAW method. Our multi-criteria evaluation framework is used for evaluating the performance of a fish farm, called Malina, located near the villages Sendreni and Smardan, Galati county, Romania. About 127 ha out of a total fishery area of 131 ha are covered by water. The analysis ranks the performance of the fish farm over a period of seven years so the output is a trend over time reflecting the progress of the fish farm.

The proposed framework enables the decision makers to understand better the whole evaluation process. It provides a more accurate, effective, and systematic evaluation tool.

REFERENCES:

  1. ANDREI, N., On Quadratic Internal Model Principle in Mathematical Programming, Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 18,(4), 2009, pp 337-348.
  2. ANDREI, N., Open Problems in Nonlinear Conjugate Gradient Algorithms for Unconstrained Optimization, Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society, 2011, in press.
  3. CHARLES, A. T., Sustainable Fishery Systems, in Fish and Aquatic Resources Series, vol. 5, Blackwell Science, Oxford, 2001.
  4. COELLO, C., A Comprehensive Survey of Evolutionary-based Multiobjective Optimisation Techniques. Knowledge and Information Systems: An International Journal 1, 1999, pp. 269-308.
  5. JANSSEN, R., Multiobjective Decision Support for Environmental Management, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1992.
  6. KALYANMOY, D., Nonlinear Goal Programming using Multi-objective Genetic Algorithms. Journal of the Operational Research Society 52, 2001, pp. 291-302.
  7. LEUNG, P. S., J. MURAOKA, S. T. NAKAMOTO, S. POOLEY, Evaluating Fisheries Management Options in Hawaii using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Fisheries Research 36 (2-3), 1998, pp.171-183.
  8. MARDLE, S., S. PASCOE, I. HERRERO, Management Objective Importance in Fisheries: An Evaluation using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Environmental Management 33 (1), 2004, pp. 1-11.
  9. NIELSEN, J. R., C. MATHIESEN, Stakeholder Preferences for Danish Fisheries Management of Sandeel and Norway Pout, Fisheries Research 77 (1), 2006, pp. 92-101.
  10. RĂDULESCU, M., C. Z. RĂDULESCU, M. TUREK RAHOVEANU, G. ZBĂGANU, A Portfolio Theory Approach to Fishery Management, Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 19(3), 2010, pp. 285-294.
  11. ROMERO, C., T. REHMAN, Multiple Criteria Analysis for Agricultural Decisions, Second Edition, Volume 11 (Developments in Agricultural Economics) Elsevier, Amsterdam, 2003.
  12. ROMERO C., Risk Programming for Agricultural Resource Allocation: A Multidimensional Risk Approach, Annals of Operations Research, 94, 2000, pp. 57-68.
  13. SAATY, T. L., The Analytic Hierarchy Process, McGraw Hill Company, New York, 1980.
  14. SAATY, T. L., Decision Making with Dependence and Feedback: The Analytic Network Process, 2nd edition, PRWS Publications, Pittsburgh, 2001.
  15. SAATY, T.L., Axiomatic Foundations of the Analytic Hierarchy Process, Management Science, vol. 32(7) July 1986, pp. 841-855.
  16. SOMA, K., How to Involve Stakeholders in Fisheries Management – A Country Case Study in Trinidad and Tobago. Marine Policy 27(1), 2003, pp. 47-58.
  17. TANGOUR, F., P. BORNE, Presentation of Some Metaheuristics for the Optimization of Complex Systems, Studies in Informatics and Control, vol. 17(2), 2008, pp 169-180.
  18. UTNE, I. B., Are the Smallest Fishing Vessels the Most Sustainable? Trade-off Analysis of Sustainability Attributes, Marine Policy 32(3), 2008, pp. 465-474.

https://doi.org/10.24846/v20i2y201110