Rating the potential land use for crop production and/or ranching is typically a process where production gains counterbalance environmental losses. Whereas the production gains are often easy to verify, the environmental losses may render visibility through the changes in the ecosystem service, such as water and habitat quality, carbon storage, etc., thus, leaving the decision maker with a multi-criteria problem. The present study demonstrates how partial-order methodology constitutes an advantageous tool for rating/ranking land use that takes trade-offs into account. It is demonstrated that not only the optimal choice of area, on an average basis, e.g., for crop production, is disclosed, but also the relative importance of the included indicators (production gains, ecosystem losses). A short introduction is given, applying data from a recent Chinese study looking for the optimal monoculture as a function of ecosystem tradeoffs. A more elaborate system applying data from the esgame was used, disclosing the most beneficial area for crop production and for ranching, as well as the relative indicators’ importance. The study further demonstrates that a single composite indicator obtained by simple aggregation of indicator values as a ranking tool may lead to a result where gains are optimized; however, this comes at the expense of the environment.
The relative importance of green infrastructure as refuge habitat for pollinators increases with local land‐use intensity