Multiple criteria decision support in forest management - the approach, methods applied, and experiences gained

被引:203
作者
Kangas, J
Kangas, A [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Helsinki, Fac Agr & Forestry, Dept Forest Resource Management, FIN-00014 Helsinki, Finland
[2] UPM Forest, FIN-37601 Valkeakoski, Finland
关键词
AHP; decision aid; forest planning; multi-criteria analysis; multi-functional forestry; operations research; outranking; SMAA; voting;
D O I
10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.023
中图分类号
S7 [林业];
学科分类号
0829 ; 0907 ;
摘要
We discuss the benefits of using multiple criteria decision support (MCDS) methods in forest management, briefly present some MCDS methods recently applied in forestry, and summarize experiences gained from MCDS applications in forestry. Applications of MCDS methods of varying characteristics can be found in the management planning of multiple-purpose forestry. However, the tool to be used should be chosen to fit the planning process at hand. When choosing a method, compromises must often be made. For instance, simple and easily understandable methods may mean loss of attainable information and, correspondingly, deficient analyses. More versatile methods enable deeper analyses and more complete exploitation of available data, but typically they are hard to use and understand. Simple and straightforward MCDS methods are needed in participatory approaches and in planning via information networks. Some recent studies indicate that, especially for behavioural reasons, it would be useful to use more than just one MCDS method, or hybrid approaches, in many planning situations. A further conclusion has been that interactive use of the methods greatly improves the efficiency of the planning process. (c) 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:133 / 143
页数:11
相关论文
共 68 条
[1]  
Alho J. M., 2001, ANAL HIERARCHY PROCE, P235
[2]  
Alho JM, 1997, FOREST SCI, V43, P521
[3]  
ALHO JM, 1996, APPL STAT-J ROY ST C, V45, P1
[4]  
[Anonymous], 2001, Journal of Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis, DOI DOI 10.1002/
[5]  
[Anonymous], 1998, J J MULTICRITERIA DE
[6]  
[Anonymous], 2001, P 6 INT S ANALYTIC H
[7]   Probabilistic judgments specified partially in the Analytic Hierarchy Process [J].
Basak, I .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1998, 108 (01) :153-164
[8]  
Belton V., 2001, MULTIPLE CRITERIA DE
[9]  
BOUYSSOU D, 2001, AIDING DECISIONS MUL
[10]   HOW TO SELECT AND HOW TO RANK PROJECTS - THE PROMETHEE METHOD [J].
BRANS, JP ;
VINCKE, P ;
MARESCHAL, B .
EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OPERATIONAL RESEARCH, 1986, 24 (02) :228-238