GIS-Based Multi Criteria Decision Analysis for Promoting Teak Plantation in Bokeo Province, Lao PDR
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Master Thesis submitted within the UNIGIS MSc. programme at the Interfaculty Department of Geoinformatics - Z_GIS University of Salzburg, Austria under the provisions of UNIGIS joint study programme with Goa University, India GIS-Based Multi Criteria Decision Analysis for Promoting Teak Plantation in Bokeo Province, Lao PDR by Anja Nicolay - Grosse Hokamp (GIS_102905) A thesis submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements of the award of the degree of Master of Science (Geographical Information Science & Systems) - MSc (GISc) Advisor (s): Dr. Shahnawaz Interfaculty Department of Geoinformatics - Z_GIS University of Salzburg, Austria Bangkok, Thailand - May 2014 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would like to thank the following people for their valuable support: Employees of RECOFTC in Bokeo and Bangkok. Frank Siegmund, Ministry of Planning and Investment, Department of Planning (MPI/DOP), Vientiane, LAO PDR Dr Shahnawaz, Interfaculty Department of Geoinformatics - Z_GIS, University of Salzburg, Austria, Last but not least I would like to thank my family, especially my husband for all the support and patience during my studies. i SCIENCE PLEDGE By my signature below, I certify that my thesis is entirely the result of my own work. I have cited all sources I have used in my thesis and I have always indicated their origin. Bangkok, Thailand – 22. May, 2014 Place and Date Signature ii ABSTRACT GIS based multi criteria decision analysis is a process that combines geographic data with value judgement based on decision makers’ preferences. This analysis combines two different scientific methods: (1) the multi-criteria decision analysis, and (2) the GIS-based analysis. Multi-criteria decision making (MCDM) is a set of tools to structure the process of decision making in order to enable the consideration and evaluation of a high number of often conflicting criteria, alternatives and opinions. In questions of spatial decisions where multiple criteria need to be considered, Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is often combined with GIS to enable mutual benefits. In this study GIS-based MCDA was used to find the most suitable locations for teak plantations in the province Bokeo in Lao PDR. Forest resources, mainly timber have played and still play a central role in Lao’s economy and development. The promotion of teak (Tectona grandis) plantations is seen as one means to generate and increase the income for the local rural population in the nation’s strive to reduce poverty through sustainable resource management. In Bokeo Province teak is an important element in the rural economy, generating between 25 and 55% of the annual household income. The Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) as a technique for organizing and analysing complex decisions based on a hierarchical tree structure with three levels. AHP was used to structure and organize the research problem and to define the necessary criteria used in the GIS. The decided on criteria were transformed into spatial layers and translated into suitability raster to be used in the weighted overlay analysis. The technique of pairwise comparison was used to determine inherent weights for each criterion. Four stakeholder groups determined four different sets of weights that were used in the final step of Weighted Overlay Analysis. iii During discussion with stakeholders it was decided on the following list of criteria to be used in the suitability analysis: altitude, slope, aspect, soil type, distance to and influence of transportation infrastructure, distance to sawmills, accessibility of villages, availability of manpower, landuse and poverty of villages. Protected areas and areas close to the hydrologic network were excluded. Based on the four different set of weights four suitability maps in raster format were created with ArcGIS software. The results show areas possible for teak plantations and their calculated suitability based on the chosen criteria. The experience of this study shows that the structured method inherent in the MCDA is very suitable for decisions with a multitude of criteria. Additionally the study shows that the method is very suitable in a problem solving environment where different stakeholders have different views about significance of factors and criteria, their measurement and their combination. The structured approach of MCDA helps in clarifying matters and guides the discussion and decision process. Easy replication and the visualisation of the results are two distinct advantages from using a GIS environment in location analysis. Key Words: MCDA, GIS, Lao PDR, Analytical Hierarchy Process, Pairwise Comparison, Location Analysis, Weighted Overlay Analysis iv CONTENTS Acknowledgement .................................................................................................................. i Science Pledge ......................................................................................................................ii Abstract................................................................................................................................. iii Contents ............................................................................................................................... v List of tables ......................................................................................................................... vii List of figures ...................................................................................................................... viii List of maps .......................................................................................................................... ix List of abbreviations .............................................................................................................. x 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Background ................................................................................................................. 1 1.2 Area of focus ............................................................................................................... 4 1.3 Aims and objectives ..................................................................................................... 9 1.4 Literature review ........................................................................................................ 10 2 Methodology .................................................................................................................... 14 2.1 Methodology .............................................................................................................. 14 2.2 Data ........................................................................................................................... 21 2.3 Software .................................................................................................................... 22 3 Processes and results ...................................................................................................... 22 3.1 MCDA procedure ....................................................................................................... 22 3.1.1 Altitude ................................................................................................................ 23 3.1.2 Slope ................................................................................................................... 24 3.1.3 Aspect ................................................................................................................. 27 3.1.4 Soil ...................................................................................................................... 30 3.1.5 Transportation infrastructure ............................................................................... 32 3.1.6 Distance to sawmills ............................................................................................ 35 3.1.7 Accessibility ........................................................................................................ 37 3.1.8 Availability of manpower ...................................................................................... 38 3.1.9 Protected areas ................................................................................................... 41 3.1.10 Sustainability ..................................................................................................... 42 3.1.11 Land use ........................................................................................................... 42 3.1.12 Poverty reduction .............................................................................................. 45 3.2 Pairwise comparison ................................................................................................. 46 3.3 Modelbuilder (steps within ArcGIS) ............................................................................ 48 3.3.1 Reference systems ............................................................................................. 48 v 3.3.2 Resolution ........................................................................................................... 48 3.3.3 GIS Data Preparation .......................................................................................... 49 3.4 Results of the location analysis .................................................................................. 59 3.5 Validation of Weighted Overlay Analysis...................................................................