Spatially Referenced Decision Analysis of Long-Term Forest Management Scenarios in Southwestern Finland

Multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) of regional level long-term forest management scenarios was conducted by applying spatially explicit information to examine the trade-offs between ecological, economic and social impacts. Interval scale judgements were applied to mapped and numerical information jointly, while assessing the performance of alternative scenarios. The experts relied mostly on the numerical information, with which they might have been more confident and familiar. The weight elicitation was based on SMART using Swings (SMARTS) and SMART Exploiting Ranks (SMARTER). SMARTS resulted in two scenarios being quite equal either due to experts truly considering them equally important or being unconfident to express their weights applying SMARTS. SMARTER was considered more understandable, but lead to total utilities having wider range. However, impact information had a greater effect on the overall utility than the weighting. Future insights include use of dynamic approach, considering the issue more from ecosystem services point of view and tighter integration of participatory MCDA and geographic information systems (GIS).

[1]  P. Anttila,et al.  Are the Finnish targets for the energy use of forest chips realistic - Assessment with a spatial market model , 2011 .

[2]  S. Sheppard,et al.  Using multi-criteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups , 2005 .

[3]  Ann-Margaret Esnard,et al.  An integrated multi-criteria scenario evaluation web tool for participatory land-use planning in urbanized areas: The Ecosystem Portfolio Model , 2013, Environ. Model. Softw..

[4]  Christopher Spray,et al.  A comparison of ecosystem services mapping tools for their potential to support planning and decision-making on a local scale , 2015 .

[5]  Bruce E. Barrett,et al.  The efficacy of SMARTER — Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique Extended to Ranking , 1996 .

[6]  Davide Geneletti,et al.  Protected area zoning for conservation and use: A combination of spatial multicriteria and multiobjective evaluation , 2008 .

[7]  Greg Brown,et al.  Methods for identifying land use conflict potential using participatory mapping , 2014 .

[8]  Sedat Keleş,et al.  Spatial forest planning: A review , 2005 .

[9]  Verena Rieser,et al.  Agent-based modelling of land use dynamics and residential quality of life for future scenarios , 2013, Environ. Model. Softw..

[10]  Patricia Balvanera,et al.  Methods for mapping ecosystem service supply: a review , 2012 .

[11]  Mark E. Eiswerth,et al.  Maximizing conserved biodiversity: why ecosystem indicators and thresholds matter , 2001 .

[12]  L. Robin Keller,et al.  Decision Analysis with Geographically Varying Outcomes: Preference Models and Illustrative Applications , 2014, Oper. Res..

[13]  M Rutgers,et al.  How to calculate the spatial distribution of ecosystem services--natural attenuation as example from The Netherlands. , 2012, The Science of the total environment.

[14]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis , 2001 .

[15]  Raimo P. Hämäläinen,et al.  Decision Support by Interval SMART/SWING - Incorporating Imprecision in the SMART and SWING Methods , 2005, Decis. Sci..

[16]  M. Pérez-Soba,et al.  Mapping cultural ecosystem services: a framework to assess the potential for outdoor recreation across the EU , 2014 .

[17]  Greg Brown,et al.  Key issues and research priorities for public participation GIS (PPGIS): A synthesis based on empirical research , 2014 .

[18]  H. Welsch,et al.  Meaningful environmental indices: a social choice approach , 2004 .

[19]  E. Primmer,et al.  Forest owner perceptions of institutions and voluntary contracting for biodiversity conservation: Not crowding out but staying out , 2014 .

[20]  Adrienne Grêt-Regamey,et al.  Assessing the impacts of economic and climate changes on land-use in mountain regions: A spatial dynamic modeling approach , 2012 .

[21]  P. Goodwin,et al.  Weight approximations in multi-attribute decision models , 2002 .

[22]  Artti Juutinen,et al.  Identifying Environmental and Natural Resource Management Conflict Potential Using Participatory Mapping , 2017 .

[23]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview , 2004 .

[24]  E. Roszkowska.  Rank Ordering Criteria Weighting Methods – a Comparative Overview , 2013 .

[25]  M. G. Morgan.  Use (and abuse) of expert elicitation in support of decision making for public policy , 2014, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[26]  S. Kaplan,et al.  Toward a Methodology for the Measurement of Knowledge Structures of Ordinary People , 1997 .

[27]  Darius J. Semmens,et al.  A comparative assessment of decision-support tools for ecosystem services quantification and valuation , 2013 .

[28]  Davide Geneletti,et al.  A GIS-based decision support system to identify nature conservation priorities in an alpine valley , 2004 .

[29]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Selecting Attributes to Measure the Achievement of Objectives , 2005, Oper. Res..

[30]  K. Miettinen,et al.  Spatially dynamic forest management to sustain biodiversity and economic returns. , 2014, Journal of environmental management.

[31]  Kim Pingoud,et al.  Assessing the integrated climatic impacts of forestry and wood products. , 2010 .

[32]  M. Ollikainen.  Forestry in bioeconomy – smart green growth for the humankind , 2014 .

[33]  K. Miettinen,et al.  Managing a boreal forest landscape for providing timber, storing and sequestering carbon , 2015 .

[34]  J. Kangas,et al.  Assessing ecological values with dependent explanatory variables in multi-criteria forest ecosystem management , 2003 .

[35]  Alexander J. Henshaw,et al.  Polyscape: A GIS mapping framework providing efficient and spatially explicit landscape-scale valuation of multiple ecosystem services , 2013 .

[36]  Graham Jewitt,et al.  Mapping ecosystem services across scales and continents – A review , 2015 .

[37]  L. Coscieme,et al.  Scale and ecological dependence of ecosystem services evaluation: Spatial extension and economic value of freshwater ecosystems in Italy , 2013 .

[38]  P. Verburg,et al.  Spatial quantification and valuation of cultural ecosystem services in an agricultural landscape , 2014 .

[39]  Joan E. Luther,et al.  An approach to GIS-based multiple criteria decision analysis that integrates exploration and evaluation phases: Case study in a forest-dominated landscape , 2010 .

[40]  Carlos Romero,et al.  Making forestry decisions with multiple criteria: A review and an assessment , 2008 .

[41]  Giuseppe Carenini,et al.  Dealing with the Expert Inconsistency in Probability Elicitation , 2000, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[42]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Multi-criteria natural resource management with preferentially dependent decision criteria. , 2005, Journal of environmental management.

[43]  M. Strager,et al.  Incorporating stakeholder preferences for land conservation: Weights and measures in spatial MCA , 2006 .

[44]  F. H. Barron,et al.  SMARTS and SMARTER: Improved Simple Methods for Multiattribute Utility Measurement , 1994 .

[45]  Jacek Malczewski,et al.  GIS‐based multicriteria decision analysis: a survey of the literature , 2006, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[46]  Jamie P. Monat,et al.  The benefits of global scaling in multi-criteria decision analysis , 2009, Judgment and Decision Making.

[47]  Roope Ruotsalainen,et al.  Assessing the provisioning potential of ecosystem services in a Scandinavian boreal forest: Suitability and tradeoff analyses on grid-based wall-to-wall forest inventory data , 2017 .

[48]  D. Schmoldt,et al.  The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making , 2001, Managing Forest Ecosystems.

[49]  Ralph L. Keeney,et al.  Feature Article - Decision Analysis: An Overview , 1982, Oper. Res..

[50]  Bruce E. Barrett,et al.  Decision quality using ranked attribute weights , 1996 .

[51]  Guillermo A. Mendoza,et al.  Multi-criteria decision analysis in natural resource management: A critical review of methods and new modelling paradigms , 2006 .

[52]  A. Kilpeläinen,et al.  Integration of Management Measures for Bioenergy Production from Spatial and Temporal Perspectives in a Forest Region—the Case of Finland , 2013 .

[53]  R. D. Groot,et al.  Challenges in integrating the concept of ecosystem services and values in landscape planning, management and decision making , 2010 .

[54]  Greg Brown,et al.  Assessing multiple approaches for modelling land-use conflict potential from participatory mapping data , 2017 .

[55]  Martin Nolan,et al.  Bringing ecosystem services into integrated water resources management. , 2013, Journal of environmental management.