Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Multiple Criteria Decision-Making in Forest Planning: Recent Results and Current Challenges

  • Chapter
Handbook Of Operations Research In Natural Resources

Part of the book series: International Series In Operations Research amp; Mana ((ISOR,volume 99))

Forest management is becoming a complex process that requires decision making involving economic, environmental and social criteria. This means that multiple criteria decision-making (MCDM) approaches need to be used in many forestry contexts. This chapter aims at assessing the efforts undertaken over the last 30 years towards formulating and solving forest management problems from an MCDM perspective. The goal of the chapter is not to compile an exhaustive list of MCDM applications in forestry but to detect the areas within forest management in which MCDM approaches have proven to be more productive or have significant future potential.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 89.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bantayan, N. C., and Bishop, I. D., 1998, Linking objective and subjective modelling for landuse decision-making. Landscape and Urban Planning 43: 35-48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bell, D. E., 1977, A decision analysis of objectives for a forest pest problem, in: Conflicting Objectives in Decisions, D. D. Bell, R. L. Keeney, and H. E. Raiffa, ed., Wiley, New York, pp. 389-418.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertier, P., and Montgolfier, J., 1974, On multicriteria analysis: an application to a forest management problem. Metra 13: 33-45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bertomeu, M., and Romero, C., 2001, Managing forest biodiversity: a zero-one goal programming approach. Agricultural Systems 68: 197-213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bertomeu, M., and Romero, C., 2002, Forest management optimisation models and habitat diversity: a goal programming approach. Journal of the Operational Research Society 53: 1175-1184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bevers, M., and Hof, J., 1999, Spatially optimizing wildlife habitat edge effects in forest management linear and mixed-integer programs. Forest Science 45: 249-258.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bojórquez-Tapia, L. A., De La Cueva, H., Díaz, S., Melgarejo, D., Alcantar, G., Solares, M. J., Grobet, G., and Cruz-Bello, G., 2004, Environmental conflicts and nature reserves: redesigning Sierra San Pedro Mártir National Park, Mexico. Biological Conservation 117: 111-126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bousson, E., 2001, Development of a multicriteria decision support system adapted to multiple-use forest management: application to forest management at the management unit level in Southern Belgium, in: Criteria and Indicators for Sustainable Forest Management at the Forest Management Unit Level, A. Franc, O. Laroussinie, and T. Karjalainen, eds., EFI Proceedings, Joensuu, Finland, pp. 151-164.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buongiorno, J., Dahir, S., Chih Lu, H., and Ching-Rong, L., 1994, Tree size diversity and economic returns in uneven-aged forest stands. Forest Science 40: 83-103.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buongiorno, J., Peyron, J. L., Houllier, F., and Bruciamacchie, M., 1995, Growth and management of mixed-species, uneven-aged forests in the French Jura: implications for economic returns and tree diversity. Forest Science 41: 397-429.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, D. R., Vogiatzis, M., Moss, C. B., and Arvanitis, L. G., 1997, Ecosystem management or infeasible guidelines? Implications of adjacency constraints for wildlife habitat and timber production. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 27: 1302-1310.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chang, S., and Buongiorno, J., 1981, A programming for multiple use forestry. Journal of Environmental Management 13: 45-58.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charnes, A., and Cooper, W. W., 1961, Management Models and Industrial Applications of Linear Programming, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohon, J. L., 1978, Multiobjective Programming and Planning, Academic Press, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Balteiro, L., and Romero, C., 1998, Modeling timber harvest scheduling problems with multiple criteria: an application in Spain. Forest Science 44: 47-57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Balteiro, L., and Romero, C., 2003, Forest management optimisation models when carbon captured is considered: a goal programming approach. Forest Ecology and Management 174: 447-457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Balteiro, L., and Romero, C., 2004, Sustainability of forest management plans: a discrete goal programming approach. Journal of Environmental Management 71: 351-359.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Diaz-Balteiro, L., and Romero, C., 2004, MCDM and forest management: a review. Working Paper, Technical University of Madrid.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ducey, M. J., and Larson, B. C., 1999, A fuzzy set approach to the problem of sustainability. Forest Ecology and Management 115: 29-40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Field, D. B., 1973, Goal programming for forest management. Forest Science 19: 125-135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Field, R. C., Dress, P. E., and Fortson, J. C., 1980, Complementary linear and goal programming procedures for timber harvest scheduling. Forest Science 26: 121-133.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forman, E. H., and Gass, S. I., 2001, The analytic hierarchy process-an exposition. Operations Research 49: 469-486.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fraser, N. M., and Hauge, J. W., 1998, Multicriteria approval: application of approval voting concepts to MCDM problems. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 7: 263-272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hotvedt, J. E., 1983, Application of linear goal programming to forest harvest scheduling. Southern Journal Agricultural Economics 15: 103-108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hotvedt, J. E., Leuschner, W. A., and Buhyoff, G. J., 1982, A heuristic weight determination procedure for goal programs used for harvest scheduling models. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 12: 292-298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ignizio, J. P., 1976, Goal Programming and Extensions, Lexington Books, Lexington, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ignizio, J. P., and Romero, C., 2003, Goal programming, in: Encyclopedia of Information Systems, Vol. 2, H. Bidgoli, ed., Academic Press, San Diego, CA, pp. 489-500.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., Alho, J. M., Kolehmainen, O., and Mononen, A., 1998, Analyzing consistency of experts’ judgements-case of assessing forest biodiversity. Forest Science 44: 610-617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., and Kangas, A., 2002, Multiple criteria decision support methods in forest management: an overview and comparative analyses, in: Multi-Objective Forest Planning, E. T. Pukkala, ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 37-70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., and Kangas, A., 2003, Multicriteria approval and Smaa-O in natural resources decision analysis with both ordinal and cardinal criteria. Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis 12: 3-15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., and Kuusipalo, J., 1993, Integrating biodiversity into forest management planning and decision-making. Forest Ecology and Management 61: 1-15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kangas, J., and Pukkala, T., 1996, Operationalization of biodiversity as a decision objective in tactical forest planning. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 26: 103-111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kao, C., and Brodie, J. D., 1979, Goal programming for reconciling economic, even flow, and regulation objectives in forest harvest scheduling. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 9: 525-531.

    Google Scholar 

  • Keeney, R. L., and Raiffa, H., 1976, Decision with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Trade-Offs, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuusipalo, J., and Kangas, J., 1994, Managing biodiversity in a forest environment. Conservation Biology 8: 450-460.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, S., Kangas, A., and Kangas, J., 2002, Applying voting theory in natural resource management: a case of multiple-criteria group decision support. Journal of Environmental Management 64: 127-137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laukkanen, S., Palander, T., and Kangas, J., 2004, Applying voting theory in participatory decision support for sustainable timber harvesting. Canadian Journal of Forest Research 34: 1511-1524.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., and Prabhu, R., 2001, A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for assessing biodiversity conservation, in: The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making., D. L. Schmoldt, J. Kangas, G. A. Mendoza, and M. Pesonen, ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 219-233.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., and Prabhu, R., 2000, Multiple criteria decision making approaches to assessing forest sustainability using criteria and indicators: a case study. Forest Ecology and Management 131: 107-126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., and Prabhu, R., 2003, Qualitative multi-criteria approaches to assessing indicators of sustainable forest resource management. Forest Ecology and Management 174: 329-343.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., and Sprouse, W., 1989, Forest planning and decision making under fuzzy environments: an overview and illustration. Forest Science 35: 481-502.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mendoza, G. A., Hartanto, H., Prabhu, R., and Villanueva, T., 2002, Multicriteria and critical threshold value analysis in assessing sustainable forestry: model development and application. Journal of Sustainable Forestry 15: 25-62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Önal, H., 1997, Trade-off between structural diversity and economic objectives in forest management diversity. American Journal of Agricultural Economics 79: 1001-1012.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Önal, H., 1997, A computationally convenient diversity measure: theory and application. Environmental and Resource Economics 9: 409-427.

    Google Scholar 

  • Phua, M., and Minowa, M., 2004, A GIS-based multi-criteria decision making approach to forest conservation planning at a landscape scale: a case study in the Kinabalu Area, Sabah, Malaysia. Landscape and Urban Planning, 71: 207-222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pukkala, T., and Kangas, J., 1993, A heuristic optimisation method for forest planning and decision-making. Scandinavian Journal of Forest Research 8: 560-570.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pykalainen, J., Pukkala, T., and Kangas, J., 2001, Alternative priority models for forest planning on the landscape level involving multiple ownership. Forest Policy and Economics 2: 293-306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Riitters, K., Brodie, J. D., and Kao, C., 1982, Volume versus value maximization illustrated for Douglas-fir with thinning. Journal of Forestry 80: 83-89, 107.

    Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C., 2001, Extended lexicographic goal programming: a unifying approach. Omega. The International Journal of Management Science 29: 63-71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Romero, C., 2004, A general structure of achievement function for a goal programming model. European Journal of Operational Research 153: 675-686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B., 1968, Classement Et Choix En Presence De Points De Vue Multiples (La Methode ELECTRE). Revue Francaise d’Informatique et de Recherche Operationnelle 8: 57-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roy, B., 1991, The outranking approach and the foundations of ELECTRE methods. Theory and Decision 31: 49-73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L., 1977, A scaling method for priorities in hierachical structures. Journal of Mathematical Psychology 15: 234-281.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saaty, T. L., 1980, The Analytic Hierachy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, and Resource Allocation, McGraw-Hill, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmoldt, D. L., and Peterson, D. L., 2000, Analytical group decision making in natural resources: methodology and application. Forest Science 46: 62-75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmoldt, D. L., and Peterson, D. L., 2001, Efficient group decision making in workshop settings, in: The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making, D. L. Schmoldt, J. Kangas, G. A. Mendoza, and M. Pesonen, ed., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 97-114.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shields, D. J., Tolwinski, B., and Kent, B. M., 1999, Models for conflict resolution in ecosystem management. Socio-Economic Planning Sciences 33: 61-84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snyder, S., and Revelle, C., 1997, Multiobjective grid packing model: an application in forest management. Location Science 5: 165-180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steuer, R. E., 1989, Multiple Criteria Optimization: Theory, Computation and Application, John Wiley and Sons, New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tarp, P., and Helles, F., 1995, Multi-criteria decision-making in forest management planning - an overview. Journal of Forest Economics 1: 273-306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tecle, A., Shrestha, B. P., and Duckstein, L., 1998, A multiobjective decision support system for multiresource forest management. Group Decision and Negotiation 7: 23-40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • USDA Forest Service, 1997, Spectrum Users Guide, Ecosystem Management Analysis Center, Fort Collins, CO.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yu, P. L., 1973, A class of solutions for group decision problems. Management Science 19: 936-946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zeleny, M., 1974, A concept of compromise solutions and the method of the displaced ideal. Computers & Operations Research 1: 479-496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Forest Economics and Management, Technical University of Madrid, Spain

    Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Romero

Authors
  1. Luis Diaz-Balteiro
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlos Romero
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Andres Weintraub

  2. Technical University of Madrid, Madrid, Spain

    Carlos Romero

  3. University of Portsmouth, Portsmouth, UK

    Trond Bjørndal

  4. University of Chile, Santiago, Chile

    Rafael Epstein

  5. Diego Portales University, Santiago, Chile

    Jaime Miranda

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2007 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Diaz-Balteiro, L., Romero, C. (2007). Multiple Criteria Decision-Making in Forest Planning: Recent Results and Current Challenges. In: Weintraub, A., Romero, C., Bjørndal, T., Epstein, R., Miranda, J. (eds) Handbook Of Operations Research In Natural Resources. International Series In Operations Research amp; Mana, vol 99. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71815-6_25

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation