Adopting robust decision-making to forest management under climate change

  • Naomi Radke
  • Rasoul Yousefpour
  • Roderich von Detten
  • Stefan Reifenberg
  • Marc Hanewinkel
Review Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Risk Analysis

Abstract

Key message

Multi-objective robust decision making is a promising decision-making method in forest management under climate change as it adequately considers deep uncertainties and handles the long-term, inflexible, and multi-objective character of decisions. This paper provides guidance for application and recommendation on the design.

Context

Recent studies have promoted the application of robust decision-making approaches to adequately consider deep uncertainties in natural resource management. Yet, applications have until now hardly addressed the forest management context.

Aims

This paper seeks to (i) assemble different definitions of uncertainty and draw recommendation to deal with the different levels in decision making, (ii) outline those applications that adequately deal with deep uncertainty, and (iii) systematically review the applications to natural resources management in order to (iv) propose adoption in forest management.

Methods

We conducted a systematic literature review of robust decision-making approaches and their applications in natural resource management. Different levels of uncertainty were categorized depending on available knowledge in order to provide recommendations on dealing with deep uncertainty. Robust decision-making approaches and their applications to natural resources management were evaluated based on different analysis steps. A simplified application to a hypothetical tree species selection problem illustrates that distinct robustness formulations may lead to different conclusions. Finally, robust decision-making applications to forest management under climate change uncertainty were evaluated and recommendations drawn.

Results

Deep uncertainty is not adequately considered in the forest management literature. Yet, the comparison of robust decision-making approaches and their applications to natural resource management provide guidance on applying robust decision making in forest management regarding decision contexts, decision variables, robustness metrics, and how uncertainty is depicted.

Conclusion

As forest management is characterized by long decision horizons, inflexible systems, and multiple objectives, and is subject to deeply uncertain climate change, the application of a robust decision-making framework using a global, so-called satisficing robustness metric is recommended. Further recommendations are distinguished depending on the decision context.

Keywords

Deep uncertainty Robustness metrics Uncertainty levels Climate change Forest management Multi-objective robust decision making 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Funding source

No funding.

Supplementary material

13595_2017_641_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (639 kb)
ESM 1 (PDF 693 kb)

References

  1. Beh EH, Maier HR, Dandy GC (2015) Scenario driven optimal sequencing under deep uncertainty. Environ Model Softw 68:181–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ben-Haim Y (1985) The assay of spatially random material. Reidel, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ben-Haim Y (2006) Info-gap decision theory. Decisions under severe uncertainty, 2nd edn. Academic Press/Elsevier, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Ben-Tal A, El Ghaoui L, Nemirovski A (2009) Robust optimization. Princeton University Press, PrincetonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Beven K (2016) Facets of uncertainty. Epistemic uncertainty, non-stationarity, likelihood, hypothesis testing, and communication. Hydrol Sci J 61:1652–1665CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bonan GB (2008) Forests and climate change: forcings, feedbacks, and the climate benefits of forests. Science (New York, NY) 320:1444–1449CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Colloff MJ, Doherty MD, Lavorel S, Dunlop M, Wise RM, Prober SM (2016) Adaptation services and pathways for the management of temperate montane forests under transformational climate change. Clim Chang:267–282Google Scholar
  8. Crowe KA, Parker WH (2008) Using portfolio theory to guide reforestation and restoration under climate change scenarios. Clim Chang 89:355–370CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Daron J (2015) Challenges in using a robust decision making approach to guide climate change adaptation in South Africa. Clim Chang 132:459–473CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Deb K, Gupta H (2006) Introducing robustness in multi-objective optimization. Evol Comput 14:463–494CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. Faustmann M (1849) Calculation of the value which forestland and immature stands possess for forestry. J For Econ 1:7–44Google Scholar
  12. Gabrel V, Murat C, Thiele A (2014) Recent advances in robust optimization. An overview. Eur J Oper Res 235:471–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hadka D, Reed P (2015) Large-scale parallelization of the Borg multiobjective evolutionary algorithm to enhance the management of complex environmental systems. Environ Model Softw 69:353–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hadka D, Herman J, Reed P, Keller K (2015) An open source framework for many-objective robust decision making. Environ Model Softw 74:114–129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hall JW, Lempert RJ, Keller K, Hackbarth A, Mijere C, McInerney DJ (2012) Robust climate policies under uncertainty. A comparison of robust decision making and info-gap methods. Risk Anal 32:1657–1672Google Scholar
  16. Hallegatte S (2009) Strategies to adapt to an uncertain climate change. Glob Environ Chang 19:240–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Herman JD, Zeff HB, Reed PM, Characklis GW (2014) Beyond optimality: Multistakeholder robustness tradeoffs for regional water portfolio planning under deep uncertainty. Water Resour Res 50:7692–7713Google Scholar
  18. Herman JD, Reed PM, Zeff HB, Characklis GW (2015) How should robustness be defined for water systems planning under change? J Water Resour Plan Manag 141:4015012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ (2003) A Danish example of optimal thinning strategies in mixed-species forest under changing growth conditions caused by climate change. For Ecol Manag 180:375–388CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kasprzyk JR, Reed PM, Characklis GW, Kirsch BR (2012) Many-objective de novo water supply portfolio planning under deep uncertainty. Environ Model Softw 34:87–104CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kasprzyk JR, Nataraj S, Reed PM, Lempert RJ (2013) Many objective robust decision making for complex environmental systems undergoing change. Environ Model Softw 42:55–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Keenan RJ (2015) Climate change impacts and adaptation in forest management. A review. Ann For Sci 72:145–167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Knight FH (1921) Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Hart, Schaffner and Marx, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  24. Knoke T, Stimm B, Ammer C, Moog M (2005) Mixed forests reconsidered: A forest economics contribution on an ecological concept. For Ecol Manag 213:102–116Google Scholar
  25. Knoke T, Hildebrandt P, Klein D, Mujica R, Moog M, Mosandl R (2008) Financial compensation and uncertainty: Using mean-variance rule and stochastic dominance to derive conservation payments for secondary forests. Can J For Res 38:3033–3046Google Scholar
  26. Knoke T, Paul C, Hildebrandt P, Calvas B, Castro LM, Hartl F, Dollerer M, Hamer U, Windhorst D, Wiersma YF, Curatola Fernandez GF, Obermeier WA, Adams J, Breuer L, Mosandl R, Beck E, Weber M, Stimm B, Haber W, Furst C, Bendix J (2016) Compositional diversity of rehabilitated tropical lands supports multiple ecosystem services and buffers uncertainties. Nat Commun 7:11877CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. Lempert RJ, Collins MT (2007) Managing the risk of uncertain threshold responses: Comparison of robust, optimum, and precautionary approaches. Risk Anal 27:1009–1026Google Scholar
  28. Lempert RJ, Groves DG (2010) Identifying and evaluating robust adaptive policy responses to climate change for water management agencies in the American West. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77:960–974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Lempert RJ, Popper SW, Bankes SC (2003) Shaping the next one hundred years: New methods for quantitative, long-term policy analysis and bibliography. RAND, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
  30. Lempert RJ, Bryant BP, Bankes SC (2008) Comparing algorithms for scenario discovery. RAND, Santa MonicaGoogle Scholar
  31. Lindner M, Fitzgerald JB, Zimmermann NE, Reyer C, Delzon S, van der Maaten E, Schelhaas M-J, Lasch P, Eggers J, van der Maaten-Theunissen M, Suckow F, Psomas A, Poulter B, Hanewinkel M (2014) Climate change and European forests. What do we know, what are the uncertainties, and what are the implications for forest management? J Environ Manag 146:69–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Maier HR, Guillaume J, van Delden H, Riddell GA, Haasnoot M, Kwakkel JH (2016) An uncertain future, deep uncertainty, scenarios, robustness and adaptation. How do they fit together? Environ Model Softw 81:154–164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Matrosov ES, Woods AM, Harou JJ (2013) Robust decision making and Info-gap decision theory for water resource system planning. J Hydrol 494:43–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Matrosov ES, Huskova I, Kasprzyk JR, Harou JJ, Lambert C, Reed PM (2015) Many-objective optimization and visual analytics reveal key trade-offs for London’s water supply. J Hydrol 531:1040–1053CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. McCarthy MA, Lindenmayer DB (2007) Info-gap decision theory for assessing the management of catchments for timber production and urban water supply. Environ Manag 39:553–562CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. McDaniels T, Mills T, Gregory R, Ohlson D (2012) Using expert judgments to explore robust alternatives for forest management under climate change. Risk Anal 32:2098–2112CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. McInerney D, Lempert R, Keller K (2012) What are robust strategies in the face of uncertain climate threshold responses? Clim Chang 112:547–568CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mortazavi-Naeini M, Kuczera G, Kiem AS, Cui L, Henley B, Berghout B, Turner E (2015) Robust optimization to secure urban bulk water supply against extreme drought and uncertain climate change. Environ Model Softw 69:437–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Ogden AE, Innes J (2007) Incorporating climate change adaptation considerations into forest management planning in the boreal forest. Int For Rev 9:713–733Google Scholar
  40. Palma CD, Nelson JD (2009) A robust optimization approach protected harvest scheduling decisions against uncertainty. Can J For Res 39:342–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pasalodos-Tato M, Mäkinen A, Garcia-Gonzalo J, Borges JG, Lämås T, Eriksson LO (2013) Assessing uncertainty and risk in forest planning and decision support systems. Review of classical methods and introduction of new approaches. For Syst 22:282Google Scholar
  42. Perry N (2013) The precautionary principle, uncertainty and the Noah’s Ark problem. Wildl Res 40:117CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Petr M, Boerboom L, Ray D, van der Veen A (2014) An uncertainty assessment framework for forest planning adaptation to climate change. Forest Policy Econ 41:1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Prato T (2015) Conceptual framework for assessing the sustainability of forest fuel reduction treatments and their adaptation to climate change. Sustainability 7:3571–3591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Robinson AP, McLarin M, Moss I (2016) A simple way to incorporate uncertainty and risk into forest harvest scheduling. For Ecol Manag 359:11–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Savage LJ (1951) The theory of statistical decision. J Am Stat Assoc 46:55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Schou E, Thorsen BJ, Jacobsen JB (2015) Regeneration decisions in forestry under climate change related uncertainties and risks: Effects of three different aspects of uncertainty. Forest Policy Econ 50:11–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Seidl R (2014) The shape of ecosystem management to come: Anticipating risks and fostering resilience. Bioscience 64:1159–1169CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  49. Seidl R, Lexer MJ (2013) Forest management under climatic and social uncertainty: Trade-offs between reducing climate change impacts and fostering adaptive capacity. J Environ Manag 114:461–469CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Seidl R, Rammer W, Lexer MJ (2011) Adaptation options to reduce climate change vulnerability of sustainable forest management in the Austrian Alps. Can J For Res 41:694–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Singh R, Reed PM, Keller K (2015) Many-objective robust decision making for managing an ecosystem with a deeply uncertain threshold response. Ecol Soc 20:1–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Sniedovich M (2012) Black Swans, New Nostradamuses, Voodoo decision theories, and the science of decision making in the face of severe uncertainty. Intl Trans Op Res 19:253–281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Starr MK (1963) Product design and decision theory. Prentice-Hall, Englewood CliffsGoogle Scholar
  54. Styczynski A, Wolf J, Tah S, Bose A (2014) When decision-making processes fail: An argument for robust climate adaptation planning in the face of uncertainty. Environ Syst Decis 34:478–491CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Taleb NN (2010) The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable, 2nd edn. Penguin Books, LondonGoogle Scholar
  56. Wald A (1939) Contributions to the theory of statistical estimation and testing hypotheses. Ann Math Stat 10:299–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Walker WE, Harremoes P, Rotmans J, van der Sluijs JP, van Asselt M, Janssen P, Krayer von Krauss MP (2003) Defining uncertainty: A conceptual basis for uncertainty management in model-based decision support. Integr Assess 4:5–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walker WE, Marchau VA, Swanson D (2010) Addressing deep uncertainty using adaptive policies: introduction to section 2. Technol Forecast Soc Chang 77:917–923CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Yousefpour R, Hanewinkel M (2015) Forestry professionals’ perceptions of climate change, impacts and adaptation strategies for forests in south-west Germany. Clim Chang 130:273–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Yousefpour R, Hanewinkel M (2016) Climate change and decision-making under uncertainty. Curr Forestry Rep 2:143–149CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Yousefpour R, Jacobsen JB, Thorsen BJ, Meilby H, Hanewinkel M, Oehler K (2012) A review of decision-making approaches to handle uncertainty and risk in adaptive forest management under climate change. Ann For Sci 69:1–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© INRA and Springer-Verlag France 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Chair of Forestry Economics and Forest PlanningUniversity of FreiburgFreiburgGermany

Personalised recommendations