AN IMPLICIT/EXPLICIT APPROACH TO MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION WITH AN APPLICATION TO FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANNING*

Implicit utility/value maximization and explicit utility/value maximization are identified as two major classes of multiobjective optimization methods. Explicit methods have the advantage of being able to fully exploit the power of existing mathematical programming algorithms. A disadvantage is the high information burden they place on the decision maker. Implicit (i.e., interactive) methods have complementary strengths and weaknesses: they require less extensive information but do not lend themselves as easily to use with optimizing algorithms. We develop a hybrid implicit/explicit approach that attempts to combine the advantages of both by embedding within the implicit method a procedure that periodically formulates an approximate explicit representation of the multiobjective problem and then solves it optimally without user interaction. Operationally, this requires the frequent solution of two nonlinear programs. We also report on the implementation of this method in a forest management decision support system. This is a completely microcomputer-based implementation currently undergoing field testing for use in planning the timing and intensity of timber harvests on non-industrial forests in the southeastern United States. The system has been selected as a replacement for an earlier multiobjective program (Harrison and Rosenthal [28]) used by over 1,800 landowners.

[1]  Edward L. Hannan,et al.  A MULTIATTRIBUTE DECISION‐MAKING APPROACH TO THE SELECTION OF AN AUXILIARY DEVICE FOR ICEBREAKERS* , 1983 .

[2]  G. W. Evans,et al.  An Overview of Techniques for Solving Multiobjective Mathematical Programs , 1984 .

[3]  P. Vincke,et al.  Multicriteria analysis: survey and new directions , 1981 .

[4]  Kenneth R. Oppenheimer,et al.  A Proxy Approach To Multi-Attribute Decision Making , 1977 .

[5]  J. J. Moré,et al.  Quasi-Newton Methods, Motivation and Theory , 1974 .

[6]  Nathan Dickmeyer,et al.  Measuring the Effects of a University Planning Decision Aid , 1983 .

[7]  David Briggs,et al.  A survey of systems analysis models in forestry and the forest products industries , 1984 .

[8]  Arthur M. Geoffrion,et al.  An Interactive Approach for Multi-Criterion Optimization, with an Application to the Operation of an Academic Department , 1972 .

[9]  S. Zionts,et al.  An Interactive Multiple Objective Linear Programming Method for a Class of Underlying Nonlinear Utility Functions , 1983 .

[10]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  The art of assessing multiattribute utility functions , 1977 .

[11]  P. Farquhar State of the Art—Utility Assessment Methods , 1984 .

[12]  S. Zionts,et al.  An Interactive Programming Method for Solving the Multiple Criteria Problem , 1976 .

[13]  Ralph L. Keeney Evaluation of Proposed Storage Sites , 1979, Oper. Res..

[14]  David S. Rubin Technical Note - Vertex Generation and Cardinality Constrained Linear Programs , 1975, Oper. Res..

[15]  Jeffrey L. Ringuest,et al.  A PREEMPTIVE VALUE‐FUNCTION METHOD APPROACH FOR MULTIOBJECTIVE LINEAR PROGRAMMING PROBLEMS , 1983 .

[16]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  METHODOLOGIES FOR SITING ENERGY FACILITIES , 1980 .

[17]  Kamal Golabi,et al.  Selecting a Portfolio of Solar Energy Projects Using Multiattribute Preference Theory , 1981 .

[18]  J. G. Gros,et al.  Power plant siting: A paretian environmental approach , 1975 .

[19]  R. Rosenthal Concepts, Theory, and Techniques PRINCIPLES OF MULTIOBJECTIVE OPTIMIZATION* , 1985 .

[20]  D. H. Marks,et al.  A review and evaluation of multiobjective programing techniques , 1975 .

[21]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Measurable Multiattribute Value Functions , 1979, Oper. Res..

[22]  Rakesh K. Sarin,et al.  Preference Conditions for Multiattribute Value Functions , 1980, Oper. Res..