Rangeland management plans prioritization using the concept of ecosystem services: A case study of Fars province rangelands

Introduction: In recent years, rangeland degradation has reduced a wide range of ecosystem services for billions of people whose livelihoods depend on natural resources. Proper rangeland management can multiply the rangeland's capacity to benefit from ecosystem services. The dominant model of rangeland management is the preparation and implementation of pastoral plans. These plans, if not be properly selected and not be based on rangeland ecosystem services improving, in addition to exacerbate the downward trend of rangelands, also will result in the loss of capital. Therefore, by recognizing the effects of different management methods on ecosystem services, it is possible to change or modify rangeland management patterns. In the present study, we ranked rangeland management plans methods in Fars province using multi-criteria analysis in the context of rangeland ecosystem services. Material and methods: One of the major causes that hinder consideration of the value of ecosystem services in computation and evaluation are the heterogeneity of the different types of value measurement units, the impossibility of quantifying all values and the problems associated with the integration of quantitative and qualitative data. Therefore, given the capabilities of multi-criteria analysis methods in analyzing heterogeneous data, these methods are suitable tools for overcoming this problem and for making more reasoned and informed decisions. In the present study, fuzzy hierarchical analysis (AHP) was used to determine the weight of criteria and indices. Then, using the results of the first step as input of the PROMETHEE software, the rangeland remediation options were ranked using the PROMETHEE II analysis. Results and discussion: According to the literature on the subject and discussion with rangeland and environmental experts, 12 indicators were defined for four categories of ecosystem services. After determining the criteria, weight of criteria and indices were calculated using hierarchical analysis method. Paired comparisons of ecosystem services criteria indicated that regulatory and support services with a weight of 0.734 are more important than production and cultural services. The results of paired comparisons of ecosystem cultural service indices showed that biodiversity criterion was much more important than landscape, recreation and ecotourism criteria. Paired comparisons of sub-criteria of ecosystem services indexes showed that grazing capacity and profitabi