Spatially explicit forest harvest scheduling with difference equations
Purchase on Springer.com
$39.95 / €34.95 / £29.95*
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Spatially explicit harvest scheduling models optimize the layout of harvest treatments to best meet management objectives such as revenue maximization subject to a variety of economic and environmental constraints. A few exceptions aside, the mixed-integer programming core of every exact model in the literature requires one decision variable for every applicable prescription for a management unit. The only alternative to this “brute-force” method has been a network approach that tracks the management pathways of each unit over time via four sets of binary variables. Named after their linear programming-based aspatial predecessors, Models I and II, along with Model III, which has no spatial implementation, each of these models rely on static volume and revenue coefficients that must be calculated pre-optimization. We propose a fundamentally different approach that defines stand volumes and revenues as variables and uses difference equations and Boolean algebra to transition forest units from one planning period to the next. We show via three sets of computational experiments that the new model is a computationally promising alternative to Models I and II.
- Bare, B. B., & Norman, E. (1969). An evaluation of integer programming in forest production scheduling problems (Research Bulletin No. 847). Purdue University Agricultural Experiment Station, 7 pp.
- Berck, P. (1976). Natural resources in a competitive economy. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- Caro, F., Constantino, M., Martins, I., & Weintraub, A. (2003). A 2-opt tabu search procedure for the multiperiod forest harvesting problem with adjacency, greenup, old growth, and even flow constraints. Forest Science, 49(5), 738–751.
- Charnes, A., & Cooper, W. W. (1961). Management models and industrial applications of linear programming. New York: Wiley.
- Constantino, M., Martins, I., & Borges, J. (2008). A new mixed-integer programming model for harvest scheduling subject to maximum area restrictions. Operations Research, 56(3), 542–551. CrossRef
- Curtis, F. (1962). Linear programming: the management of a forest property. Journal of Forestry, 60(9), 611–616.
- Franklin, J., & Forman, R. (1987). Creating landscape patterns by forest cutting: ecological consequences and principles. Landscape Ecology, 1(1), 5–18. CrossRef
- FMOS—Forest Management Optimization Site (2012). University of New Brunswick, Canada. http://ifmlab.for.unb.ca/fmos/datasets/. Retrieved: 6/1/2012.
- Garcia, O. P. (1979). Modelling stand development with stochastic differential equations. In D. E. Elliott (Ed.), Forest research institute symposium: Vol. 20. Mensuration systems for forest management planning (pp. 315–334). New Zealand: New Zealand Forest Service.
- Goycoolea, M., Murray, A., Barahona, F., Epstein, R., & Weintraub, A. (2005). Harvest scheduling subject to maximum area restrictions: exploring exact approaches. Operations Research, 53(3), 490–500. CrossRef
- Goycoolea, M., Murray, A., Vielma, J. P., & Weintraub, A. (2009). Evaluating approaches for solving the area restriction model in harvest scheduling. Forest Science, 55(2), 149–165.
- Gunn, E. A., & Rai, A. K. (1987). Modelling and decomposition for planning long-term forest harvesting in an integrated industry structure. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 17(12), 1507–1518. CrossRef
- Gunn, E. A., & Richards, E. W. (2005). Solving the adjacency problem with stand-centred constraints. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 35(4), 832–842. CrossRef
- Hof, J., Bevers, M., & Kent, B. (1997). An optimization approach to area-based forest pest management over time and space. Forest Science, 43(1), 121–128.
- Johansson, P. O., & Löfgren, K. G. (1985). The economics of forestry and natural resources. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
- Johnson, K. N., & Scheurman, H. L. (1977). Techniques for prescribing optimal timber harvest and investment under different objectives—discussion and synthesis. Forest Science Monograph, 18.
- Kidd, W. Jr., Thompson, E., & Hoepner, P. (1966). Forest regulation by linear programming—a case study. Journal of Forestry, 64(9), 611–613.
- Kirby, M. W., Wong, P., Hager, W. A., & Huddleston, M. E. (1980). Guide to the integrated resource planning model. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Management Sciences Staff., Berkeley, CA, 212 pp.
- Lockwood, C., & Moore, T. (1993). Harvest scheduling with spatial constraints: a simulated annealing approach. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 23, 468–478. CrossRef
- Loucks, D. (1964). The development of an optimal program for sustained-yield management. Journal of Forestry, 62(7), 485–490.
- McArdle, R. E., Meyer, W. H., & Bruce, D. (1961). The yield of Douglas-fir in the Pacific Northwest (Technical Bulletin No. 201). USDA Forest Service, Washington, DC, 72 pp. (rev.).
- McDill, M. (1989). Timber supply in dynamic general equilibrium. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Forestry, Pennsylvania State University.
- McDill, M., Rebain, S., & Braze, J. (2002). Harvest scheduling with area-based adjacency constraints. Forest Science, 48(4), 631–642.
- Murray, A. T., Goycoolea, M., & Weintraub, A. (2004). Incorporating average and maximum area restrictions in harvest scheduling models. Canadian Journal of Forest Resources, 34(2), 456–464. CrossRef
- Murray, A. T. (1999). Spatial restrictions in harvest scheduling. Forest Science, 45(1), 45–52.
- Nautiyal, J. C., & Pearse, P. H. (1967). Optimizing the conversion to sustained yield—a programming solution. Forest Science, 13(2), 131–139.
- O’Hara, A. J., Faaland, B. H., & Bare, B. B. (1989). Spatially constrained timber harvest scheduling. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 19, 715–724. CrossRef
- Pienaar, L. V., & Turnbull, K. J. (1973). The Chapman-Richards generalization of Von Bertalanffy’s growth model for basal area growth and yield in even-aged stands. Forest Science, 19(1), 2–22.
- Richards, E. W., & Gunn, E. A. (2003). Tabu search design for difficult forest management optimization problems. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 33, 1126–1133. CrossRef
- Snyder, S., & ReVelle, C. (1996). Temporal and spatial harvesting of irregular systems of parcels. Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 26(6), 1079–1088. CrossRef
- Snyder, S., & ReVelle, C. (1997). Dynamic selection of harvests with adjacency restrictions: the SHARe model. Forest Science, 43(2), 213–222.
- Timber Mart-South (2008). Warnell School of Forest Resources. University of Georgia, Athens, GA. http://www.timbermart-south.com/. Last accessed: 10/4/2011.
- Tóth, S. F., McDill, M. E., Könnyű, N., & George, S. (2013). Testing the use of lazy constraints in solving area-based adjacency formulations in harvest scheduling models. Forest Science. doi:10.5849/forsci.11-040.
- Tóth, S. F., McDill, M. E., Könnyű, N., & George, S. (2012). A strengthening procedure for the path formulation of the area-based adjacency problem in harvest scheduling models. Mathematical and Computational Forestry and Natural Resources Sciences, 4(1), 16–38.
- United States Congress (1976). National Forest Management Act of 1976. 16 U.S.C. 1600.
- Williams, H. P. (1999). Model building in mathematical programming (4th ed.). New York: Wiley, 354 pp.
- Spatially explicit forest harvest scheduling with difference equations
Annals of Operations Research
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Springer US
- Additional Links
- Harvest scheduling
- Integer programming
- Spatial optimization
- Industry Sectors