 Welcome back. I hope after going through the first video and the reading materials, you're already familiar with what HP is as well as its advantages and limitations. In this video and the next, we will briefly look at how HP has been used to date and introduce you to two examples of using HP to analyze land use tradeoffs. And a lot of the experiences shared in this virtual training are drawn from those two examples. As mentioned in previous video, HP has been widely used in complex decision-making processes covering a wide range of sectors and topics, including house, company resolution, government policy design, marketing banking, corporate social responsibilities, supply chain management, technology selection, and many others. Since sustainable development issues like sustainable land use inherently involves multiple competing objectives, it's not surprising that HP has also been used extensively to look at sustainable development issues including nature conservation, sustainable forest management, environmental impact evaluation, and sustainable land uses. I won't be able to give a detailed example here, but you can find some selected examples in the reading materials. And I encourage everyone to do some research yourself on the topics you're interested in to find out more about existing research on various topics using HP. For land use decisions, broadly speaking, there are two ways to use HP. The first option is to use some parts of the HP process to identify criteria considered or drivers of land use decisions and their relative importance. As you will remember, the first stage of HP are to clarify what land use decisions you're trying to make. For example, you're trying to decide whether and where to expand your agricultural land, or maybe you're trying to select the best conservation strategy. Once the final aim is clear, we then identify the criteria and the sub criteria that will be used to make such a decision, as well as their relative importance to the decision makers. Different stakeholders or land managers may consider different criteria and sub criteria, and will have different preferences and priorities. If you're interested to understand better those differences and how trade-offs among different criteria managed, you can use the first stage of HP as a framework to engage stakeholders to investigate and understand better those drivers of decisions. In the reading materials, you can find some examples on how HP was used to identify criteria and drivers of decisions. We will also provide an example in this training module of using HP to understand how different agricultural land managers managed trade-offs in their land use decision making in the Sentinel project. But more commonly, researchers have been using the whole process of HP to support making a land use decision, and you can find a lot more published research articles on fully applied HP. To support land use decisions, HP has been used to identify risks and vulnerabilities, for example, vulnerability to climate change, assessing environmental impacts of land use and assess different land use strategies, alternatives, and scenarios. It's often combined with other methods and tools, for example, geographic information systems, also known as GIS. In the reading materials, we have included some selected open access examples, but there are probably hundreds more you can find, especially if you have access to page journals and publications. We will also provide an example from New Zealand in this training module on how HP can be used to support land use decision that involves trade-offs across different criteria. In the rest of the video, I will briefly introduce you to an example of using HP to understand how different agriculture land managers manage trade-offs in their land expansion decisions in Ghana and Zambia. In many African countries, rapid population growth and persistent low agriculture land productivity have been driving the loss of forest and biodiversity and the ecosystem services they provide. There is an urgent need to manage the trade-offs and strike a balance between increasing food production to meet rising food demand and reduce poverty while conserving nature. To do so, policymakers and researchers must engage managers of agriculture land and understand better how to incentivize and support them to manage environmental, social, and economic trade-offs in their land use decisions. It's also important to note that there are many different land manager types in Africa. Well, the majority are smallholder individual farmers, there are also increasing number of farmers cooperatives, local and international companies, as well as public agencies and nonprofit organizations who are managing agriculture land. They all may have different preferences and different decision-making processes, but there is currently little research to understand the drivers of their decisions. HP was used as a methodology in Ghana and Zambia to fill this research gap as part of the Sentinel project. You can find more information about the Sentinel project by visiting the link shown at the bottom of the slide. Here I want to briefly explain why we choose the HP as a methodology and how we applied it in our research to provide you with some inspirations and background information before you start module 203. We will read where we will refer back to this particular research as well as the research down in New Zealand and which Professor Renwick will introduce in the next video. We choose a HP as a methodology to use and develop this particular training course for in the Sentinel project because we are looking for tools to help map drivers of decisions which can specifically investigate and understand better trade-offs in decision-making. As mentioned before, those trade-offs and decision-making processes are not so well understood, but are really important for the future of sustainable land use in Africa. We're also working across an interdisciplinary team based in the UK and Africa with limited time and budget and we're like to find a tool that's easy to use. In addition, we're keen to develop applied research that can provide practical insights and it can be done participatory to help engage a wide range of key stakeholders like farmers, NGOs, government and the private sector. To recall the key advantages of HP explained in the earlier video, HP is very good match that meets all those needs. So how did we use HP in our research? Because in this research we aim to understand the drivers of decisions and the trade-offs in land use decision-making. So it's the part of the HP process to identify criteria and sub-criteria are also referred to as domain and sub-domains in this virtual training. We only did pairwise comparison of the criteria and interview different landowners to help identify the sub-criteria, but we did not do pairwise comparison amongst those sub-criteria identified. To limit pairwise comparison to criteria or domain level as we will talk about in module two because that the researchers who led the research in Ghana and Zambia are from very diverse background and never used HP before. They helped try an early version of this training module to learn HP and providing valuable inputs which has shaped this training module. Since it is the first time applying HP it's important to keep the process as simple and straightforward as possible. At the same time it's also important to keep the process simple and straightforward for the diverse land managers they interview, which includes individual farmers, government officials, business managers and cooperative managers. They all have very different level of education expertise. As mentioned in an early video, doing pairwise comparison for too many criteria can take a long time so we want to ensure we don't tire those key stakeholders out in the interviews. And we also want to make sure we have time to explore the specifics of what drives their land use decision and get important qualitative information from them to better understand how they manage land use trade-offs. The main limitation of such an approach is that it only reviews limited information about important trade-offs amongst the sub-criteria and only offers glimpses of preferences of a decision maker. For example, a land manager may consider many environmental factors under environment criteria including climate change, forest cover and soil suitability. While pairwise comparison at the criteria level may tell you that environmental issues are far more important for the land managers than economic issues, we wouldn't necessarily have investigated which of those three environmental factors are the most important drivers of land use decisions. But such approach also has its advantages. First and foremost, as mentioned, the interview process can be easier to manage, especially you're new to AHP and you want to engage a large number of diverse stakeholders, but have limited time as you don't need to do too many pairwise comparison, which can be time consuming. Especially if you structure interview questions well, you can still review many useful qualitative and quantitative information on the sub-criteria that land managers consider when making their decisions. For example, you could compare the diversity of factors considered by different land managers. You can see the example on the bottom right of this slide on how you may be able to do that. You can also identify common criteria or common drivers among different land managers, which can be helpful to identify the most effective policy measures and incentives that can influence different types of land managers. You can also get other qualitative information that can help you inform your research and review useful practical insights. For example, land use decision making process that are used to manage those trade-offs. The insights generated from the research can be very useful for other researchers, or at least two of your research, where you can use the sub-criteria identified through participatory approach as a foundation for four AHP applications. So if you're just traveling AHP for the first time, have limited resources and time, or is investigating a new topic where there's not that much information on sub-criteria yet, this approach is worth considering. This approach adopted by Sentinel, which also will be referenced in the rest of the virtual training, so you can learn more about its contrast with other type of use of AHP. In the next video, you will learn about a complementary example of how AHP is applied in New Zealand to understand land use trade-offs and support land use decision making. See you there.