Abstract
Decision making in forest planning often involves situations, where the value of the stand is dependent on its location or the properties of the stands nearby. Often the most intuitive tool to describe spatial objectives and outcomes is a visual map. However, evaluating and comparing different maps may prove a considerable cognitive burden, especially over large areas and in long-term planning. In this study, we investigate the use of value functions for eliciting spatial preference information from maps. Our case study is part of a project investigating the possibilities of increasing broadleaf-tree-dominated habitats in a northern Swedish landscape. The experts involved in the project evaluated maps showing different fragmentation patterns. Different spatial indices were then calculated for the maps, and expert evaluations were used to sketch value functions describing the preferred fragmentation level. The approach was found to be a quick way of translating spatial preferences into numerical values and conceptualizing the relatively abstract concept of fragmentation in the landscape. Furthermore, the results show that the choice of a certain fragmentation index has a crucial effect on the value function.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Ananda J, Herath G (2003) Incorporating stakeholder values into regional forest planning: a value function approach. Ecol Econ 45(1):75–90. doi:10.1016/S0921-8009(03)00004-1
Ananda J, Herath G (2009) A critical review of multi-criteria decision making methods with special reference to forest management and planning. Ecol Econ 68(10):2535–2548. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2009.05.010
Andrén H (1994) Effects of habitat fragmentation on birds and mammals in landscapes with different proportions of suitable habitat—a review. Oikos 71(3):355–366. doi:10.2307/3545823
Baskent EZ, Keles S (2005) Spatial forest planning: a review. Ecol Model 188(2–4):145–173. doi:10.1016/j.ecolmodel.2005.01.059
Beinat E (1997) Value functions for environmental management. Kluwer, Dordrecht
Belton V, Stewart TJ (2002) Multiple criteria decision analysis: an integrated approach. Kluwer, Boston
Edenius L, Mikusiński G (2006) Utility of habitat suitability models as biodiversity assessment tools in forest management. Scand J For Res 21(S7):62–72. doi:10.1080/14004080500486989
Edwards W, Barron FH (1994) SMARTS and SMARTER: improved simple methods for multi attribute utility measurement. Organ Behav Hum Decis 60(3):306–325. doi:10.1006/obhd.1994.1087
Fahrig L (1997) Relative effects of habitat loss and fragmentation on population extinction. J Wildl Manage 61(3):603–610
Fahrig L (2003) Effects of habitat fragmentation on biodiversity. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:487–515. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.34.011802.132419
Fischer J, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Landscape modification and habitat fragmentation: a synthesis. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 16(3):265–280. doi:10.1111/j.1466-8238.2007.00287
Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Chiclana F (2001) Multi person decision-making based on multiplicative preference relations. Eur J Oper Res 129(2):372–385. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(99)00197-6
Holmström H, Korosuo A (2011) Framtidsanalyser av Vindelns lövvärdetrakt (Future analyzes of broadleaf-values in Vindeln). In: Skötselförslag för Vindelns lövvärdetrakt-Ett naturvårdsprojekt enligt landskapsstrategimodellen (Meddelande nr 3). Länsstyrelsen Västerbotten. http://www.lansstyrelsen.se/vasterbotten/SiteCollectionDocuments/Sv/Publikationer/2011/Meddelande%203%20Bilagor.pdf. Accessed 15 May 2012
Hsu HM, Chen CT (1996) Aggregation of fuzzy opinions under group decision making. Fuzzy Set Syst 79(3):279–285. doi:-10.1016/0165-0114(95)00185-9
Kajanus M, Kangas J, Kurttila M (2004) The use of value focused thinking and the A’WOT hybrid method in tourism management. Tour Manage 25(4):499–506. doi:10.1016/S0261-5177(03)00120-1
Kangas J, Kangas A (2005) Multiple criteria decision support in forest management—the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained. For Ecol Manage 207(1–2):133–143. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.023
Kangas J, Alho JM, Kolehmainen O, Mononen A (1998) Analyzing consistency of experts’ judgments–case of assessing forest biodiversity. For Sci 44(4):610–617
Kangas A, Haapakoski R, Tyrväinen L (2008) Integrating place-specific social values into forest planning–case of UPM-Kymmene forests in Hyrynsalmi Finland. Silva Fenn 42(5):773–790
Korosuo A, Wikström P, Öhman K, Eriksson LO (2011) An integrated MCDA software application for forest planning: a case study in southwestern Sweden. MCFNS 3(2):75–86
Kurttila M (2001) The spatial structure of forests in the optimization calculations of forest planning—a landscape ecological perspective. For Ecol Manage 142(1–3):129–142. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(00)00343-1
Kurttila M, Pukkala T, Loikkanen J (2002) The performance of alternative spatial objective types in forest planning calculations: a case for flying squirrel and moose. For Ecol Manage 166(1–3):245–260. doi:10.1016/s0378-1127(01)00664-8
Li H, Wu J (2004) Use and misuse of landscape indices. Landsc Ecol 19(4):389–399. doi:10.1023/B:LAND.0000030441.15628.d6
MacMillan D, Marshall K (2004) Optimising capercailzie habitat in commercial forestry plantations. For Ecol Manage 198(1):351–365. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.05.027
Nordström EM, Eriksson LO, Öhman K (2010) Integrating multiple criteria decision analysis in participatory forest planning: experience from a case study in northern Sweden. For Policy Econ 12(8):562–574. doi:10.1016/j.forpol.2010.07.006
Nordström EM, Eriksson LO, Öhman K (2011) Multiple criteria decision analysis with consideration to place-specific values in participatory forest planning. Silva Fenn 45(2):253–265
Öhman K (2000) Creating continuous areas of old forest in long-term forest planning. Can J For Res 30(11):1817–1823. doi:10.1139/cjfr-30-11-1817
Öhman K, Lämås T (2005) Reducing forest fragmentation in long-term forest planning by using the shape index. For Ecol Manage 212(1–3):346–357. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2005.03.059
Öhman K, Edenius L, Mikusiński G (2011) Optimizing spatial habitat suitability and timber revenue in long-term forest planning. Can J For Res 41(3):543–551. doi:10.1139/X10-232
Pukkala T (2004) Dealing with ecological objectives in the Monsu planning system. Silva Lus 12(Especial):1–15. Retrieved from http://www.scielo.gpeari.mctes.pt/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S0870-63522004000100001&lng=pt&nrm=iso
Store R, Jokimäki J (2003) A GIS-based multi-scale approach to habitat suitability modeling. Ecol Model 169(1):1–15. doi:10.1016/s0304-3800(03)00203-5
Store R, Kangas J (2001) Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modelling. Landsc Urban Plan 55(2):79–93. doi:10.1016/s0169-2046(01)00120-7
von Winterfeldt D, Edwards W (1986) Decision analysis and behavioural research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Wei Y, Hoganson HM (2006) Spatial information for scheduling core area production in forest planning. Can J For Res 36(1):23–33. doi:10.1139/X05-233
Wikström P, Edenius L, Elfving B, Eriksson LO, Lämås T, Sonesson J, Öhman K, Wallerman J, Waller C, Klintebäck F (2011) The Heureka forestry decision support system: an overview. MCFNS 3(2):87–94
Acknowledgments
This analysis was partly done in collaboration with the research program Future Forests supported by the Foundation for Strategic Environmental Research (MISTRA), the Swedish Forestry industry, the Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences (SLU), Umeå University, and the Forestry Research Institute of Sweden. This work was also partially funded by the ForEAdapt project (PIRSES-GA-2010-269257) funded by 7th EU Framework Programme. The authors thank Mr. Andreas Garpebring, County Administrative Board of Västerbotten, and the other experts and representatives working in the project. We are also grateful to Prof. Andrés Weintraub for valuable discussions during the project and to two anonymous reviewers for useful comments that helped to improve the manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by A. Weiskittel.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Korosuo, A., Holmström, H., öhman, K. et al. Using value functions to elicit spatial preference information. Eur J Forest Res 132, 551–563 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-013-0695-0
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10342-013-0695-0