Assessing ecological values with dependent explanatory variables in multi-criteria forest ecosystem management

Ecological Modelling

Volumn 170, Issue 1, 2003, Pages 1-12

  Leskinen, Pekka ^a   Kangas, Jyrki ^b   Pasanen, Anna Mari ^a  

^a FINNISH FOREST RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Finland)

^b UPM Kymmene Forest   (Finland)

Author keywords

Biodiversity; Interactions; Multi criteria planning; Regression; Uncertainty

Indexed keywords

ECOSYSTEM MODELING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS;

EURASIA; EUROPE; FINLAND; KAINUU; NORTHERN EUROPE; OULU [FINLAND]; SCANDINAVIA;

EID: 0346186167     PISSN: 03043800     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0304-3800(03)00283-7     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Alho, J.M., Kolehmainen, O., Leskinen, P., 2001. Regression methods for pairwise comparisons data. In: Schmoldt, D.L., Kangas, J., Mendoza, G.A., Pesonen, M. (Eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 235-251.
2. Bertomeu, M., Romero, C., 2001. Managing forest biodiversity: a zero-one goal programming approach. Agric. Syst. 68, 197-213.
3. Bock, W., Salski, A., 1998. A fuzzy knowledge-based model of population dynamics of the Yellow-necked mouse (Apodemus flavicollis) in a beech forest. Ecol. Model. 108, 155-161.
4. Davis, F.W., Stoms, D.M., Estes, J.E., Scepan, J., Scott, J.M., 1990. An information systems approach to the preservation of biological diversity. Int. J. Geog. Inf. Syst. 4, 55-78.
5. Eiswerth, M.E., Haney, J.C., 2001. Maximizing conserved biodiversity: why ecosystem indicators and threshold matter. Ecol. Econ. 38, 259-274.
6. Granger Morgan, M., Pitelka, L.F., Shevliakova, E., 2001. Elicitation of expert judgments of climate change impacts on forest ecosystems. Clim. Change 49, 279-307.
7. Haila, Y., Kouki, J., 1994. The phenomenon of biodiversity in conservation biology. Ann. Zool. Fennici 31, 5-18.
8. Ihalainen, M., Alho, J.M., Kolehmainen, O., Pukkala, T., 2002. Expert models for bilberry and cowberry yields in Finnish forests. Forest Ecol. Manage. 157, 15-22.
9. Izcák, J., Papp, L., 2000. A link between ecological indices and measures of biodiversity. Ecol. Model. 130, 151-156.
10. Kangas, J., 1992. Multiple-use planning of forest resources by using the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Scand. J. Forest Res. 7, 259-268.
11. Kangas, J., Pukkala, T., 1996. Operationalization of biological diversity as a decision objective in tactical forest planning. Can. J. Forest Res. 26, 103-111.
12. Kangas, J., Karsikko, J., Laasonen, L., Pukkala, T., 1993. A method for estimating the suitability function of wildlife habitat for forest planning on the basis of expertise. Silva Fennica 27, 259-268.
13. Kangas, J., Alho, J.M., Kolehmainen, O., Mononen, A., 1998. Analyzing consistency of experts' judgments - case of assessing forest biodiversity. Forest Sci. 44, 610-617.
14. Keeney, R.L., Raiffa, H., 1976. Decisions with Multiple Objectives: Preferences and Value Tradeoffs. Wiley, New York, 569 p.
15. King, J., Louw, D., 1998. Instream flow assessments for regulated rivers in South Africa using the Building Block Methodology. Aquat. Ecosyst. Health Manage. 1, 109-124.
16. Kuusipalo, J., Kangas, J., 1994. Managing biodiversity in a forestry environment. Conserv. Biol. 8, 450-460.
17. Leskinen, P., 2001. Statistical methods for measuring preferences. University of Joensuu, Publications in Social Sciences 48. D.Sc. Thesis, 111 p.
18. Leskinen, P., Kangas, J., 1998. Analysing uncertainties of interval judgment data in multiple-criteria evaluation of forest plans. Silva Fennica 32, 363-372.
19. Leskinen, P., Kangas, A.S., Kangas, J., 2003. To appear in European Journal of Operational Research. Rank-based modelling of preferences in multi-criteria decision making. Manuscript, 33 p.
20. Lähde, E., Laiho, O., Norokorpi, Y., Saksa, T., 1999. Stand structure as the basis of diversity index. Forest Ecol. Manage. 115, 213-220.
21. May, R.M., 1988. How many species are there on Earth? Science 241, 1441-1449.
22. Mendoza, G.A., Prabhu, R., 2001. A fuzzy analytic hierarchy process for assessing biodiversity conservation. In: Schmoldt, D.L., Kangas, J., Mendoza, G.A., Pesonen, M. (Eds.), The Analytic Hierarchy Process in Natural Resource and Environmental Decision Making. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 219-233.
23. Noss, R.F., 1999. Assessing and monitoring forest biodiversity: a suggested framework and indicators. Forest Ecol. Manage. 115, 135-146.
24. Pukkala, T., 1998. Monikäytön suunnitteluohjelmisto Monsu. Ohjelmiston toiminta ja käyttö. Mimeograph. University of Joensuu. Joensuu, Finland.
25. Pukkala, T., Kangas, J., 1993. A heuristic optimization method for forest planning and decision making. Scand. J. Forest Res. 8, 560-570.
26. Pukkala, T., Kangas, J., Kniivilä, M., Tiainen, A.-M., 1997. Integrating forest-level and compartment-level indices of species diversity with numerical forest planning. Silva Fennica 31, 417-429.
27. Pykäläinen, J., Kangas, J., Loikkanen, T., 1999. Interactive decision analysis in participatory strategic forest planning: experiences from state owned boreal forests. J. Forest Econ. 5, 341-364.
28. Red Data Book of Finland, 1992. Uhanalaisten eläinten ja kasvien seurantatoimikunnan mietintö. Komiteanmietintö 1991:30. Valtion painatuskeskus, Helsinki, Finland.
29. Saaty, T.L., 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol. 15, 234-281.
30. Saaty, T.L., 1980. The Analytic Hierarchy Process. Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation. McGraw-Hill, New York.
31. Schmoldt, D.L., Kangas, J., Mendoza, G.A., Pesonen, M. (Eds.), 2001. The Analytic Hierarchy Process in natural resource and environmental decision making. In: Managing Forest Ecosystems, vol. 3. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 305 p.
32. Silvennoinen, H., Alho, J.M., Kolehmainen, O., Pukkala, T., 2001. Prediction models of landscape preferences at the forest stand level. Landscape Urban Plann. 56, 11-20.
33. Sonneveld, B.G.J.S., Albersen, P.J., 1999. Water erosion assessment based on expert knowledge and limited information using an ordered logit model. J. Soil Water Conserv. 54, 592-599.
34. Vacik, H., Lexer, M.J., 2001. Application of a spatial decision support system in managing the protection forests of Vienna for sustained yield of water resources. Forest Ecol. Manage. 143, 65-76.
35. Wikström, P., Eriksson, L.O., 2000. Solving the stand management problem under biodiversity-related considerations. Forest Ecol. Manage. 126, 361-376.
36. Williams, P.H., Gaston, K.J., 1994. Measuring more of biodiversity: can higher-taxon diversity predict wholesale species richness? Biol. Conserv. 67, 211-217.