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

Volumn 71, Issue 2-4, 2005, Pages 207-222

  Phua, Mui How ^a   Minowa, Mitsuhiro ^b  

^a UNIVERSITI MALAYSIA SABAH   (Malaysia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TOKYO   (Japan)

Author keywords

Forest conservation planning; GIS; Kinabalu; Multi criteria decision making

Indexed keywords

CONSERVATION; DECISION MAKING; GEOGRAPHIC INFORMATION SYSTEMS; PLANTS (BOTANY); VEGETATION;

CLUSTERING ANALYSIS; FOREST AREAS; FOREST CONSERVATION; LANDSCAPES;

FORESTRY;

CONSERVATION PLANNING; GIS; MULTICRITERIA ANALYSIS; PROTECTED AREA;

CONSERVATION; DECISION MAKING; FORESTRY; GIS; PLANTS;

ASIA; EAST MALAYSIA; EASTERN HEMISPHERE; EURASIA; KINABALU NATIONAL PARK; MALAYSIA; SABAH; SOUTHEAST ASIA; WORLD;

ANIMALIA; RIPARIA;

EID: 11444259534     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2004.03.004     Document Type: Article

References (72)

1. Aiba S., Kitayama K. Structure, composition and species diversity in an altitude-substrate matrix of rain forest tree communities on Mount Kinabalu. Borneo. Plant Ecol. 140:1999;139-157
2. Barnes, B.V., Zak, D.R., Denton, S.R., Spurr, S.H., 1998. Forest Ecology, fourth ed. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
3. Bibby, C.J., 1998. Selecting areas for conservation. In: Sutherland, W.J. (Ed.), Conservation and Action. Blackwell Science, Oxford, pp. 176-201.
4. Boyce, S.G., 1995. Landscape Forestry. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
5. Carver S.J. Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with Geographic Information Systems. Int. J. Geog. Info. Sys. 5:1991;321-339
6. Collinge S.K. Ecological consequences of habitat fragmentation: implications for landscape architechture and planning. Landsc. Urban Planning. 36:1996;59-77
7. Cook, E.A., Van Lier, H.N., 1994. Landscape Planning and Ecological Network. Elsevier, Amsterdam.
8. Drechsler M., Wissel Ch. Trade-off between local and regional scale management of metapopulation. Biol. Conserv. 83(1):1998;31-41
9. Eastman, J.R., Kyem, A.K., Toledano, J., 1993. A procedure for multi-objective decision making in GIS under conditions of conflicting objectives. In: Proceedings of the Fourth European Conference on Geographic Information Systems, 29 March-1 April 1993, Genoa, Italy.
10. Eastman J.R., Jin W., Kyem P.A.K., Toledano J. Raster procedures for multi-criteria/multi-objective decisions. Photogram. Eng. Rem. Sen. 61:1995;539-547
11. Franklin J.F. Preserving biodiversity: species, ecosystems, or landscapes? Ecol. Applic. 3:1993;202-205
12. Hiroshima, T., 1997. A Study on Evaluation Methods of Sustainability in Forest Planning: Evaluation of Long term Forecasting of Government Based on Criteria and Indicators. Master Thesis. Department of Forest Science, The University of Tokyo, Japan.
13. Hulshoff R.M. Landscape indices describing a Dutch landscape. Landsc. Ecol. 10(2):1995;101-111
14. Hwang, C.L., Lin, M.J., 1987. Group Decision Making under Multiple Criteria. Springer-Verlag, New York.
15. Hwang, C.L., Masud, A.S.M., 1981. Multiple Attribute Decision Making: Methods and Applications. Springer-Verlag, New York.
16. IUCN, 1994. Guidelines for Protected Area Management Categories. IUCN-World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland.
17. Ive J.R., Cocks K.D., Parvey C.A. Using the LUPIS land management package to select and schedule multi-site operations. J. Environ. Manage. 29:1989;31-45
18. Janssen, R., Rietveld, P., 1990. Multicriteria analysis and Geographic Information Systems: an application to agricultural land use in the Netherlands. In: Scholten, H.J., Stillwell, J.C.H. (Eds.), Geographic Information Systems for Urban and Regional Planning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, pp. 129-139.
19. Japanese Forestry Agency, 1989. A Survey on Methods of Socioeconomic Evaluation and Scientific Management: Development of Evaluation Methods of Forest Functions. Japanese Forestry Agency, Tokyo.
20. Japanese Forestry Agency, 1991. A Survey on Standards and Quantification of Forest Functions Methods. Japanese Forestry Agency, Tokyo.
21. Japanese Forestry Agency, 1998. A Survey on Forest Evaluation Methods for Conservation of Environmental functions. Japanese Forestry Agency, Tokyo.
22. Japan Oversea Forestry Consultants Association, 1999. Final Report of the Study on Mapping and Land Cover Assessment of Mangrove Areas in The Republic of Philippines, Japan Oversea Forestry Consultants Association, Tokyo.
23. Jeffries, M., Mills, D., 1990. Freshwater Ecology: Principles and Applications. Belhaven Press, London.
24. Jones P.G., Beebe S.E., Tohme J., Galwey N.W. The use of geographic information systems in biodiversity exploration and conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. 6:1997;947-958
25. Kangas J., Loikkanen T., Pukkala T., Pykalainen J. A participatory approach to tactical forest planning. Acta Forestalia Fennica. 251:1996;1-24
26. Kangas J., Store R., Leskinen P., Mehtatalo L. Improving the quality of landscape ecological forest planning by utilising advanced decision-support tools. For. Ecol. Manage. 132:2000;157-171
27. Kato Y., Yokohari M., Brown R. Integration and visualization of the ecological value of rural landscape in maintaining the physical environment of Japan. Landsc. Urban Planning. 39:1997;69-82
28. Keisler J.M., Sundell R.C. Combining multi-attribute utility and geographic information for boundary decision: an application to park planning. J. Geog. Info. Decision Anal. 1(2):1997;101-118
29. Kitayama K. An altitudinal transect study of the vegetation on Mount Kinabalu. Borneo. Vegetatio. 102:1992;149-171
30. Kitayama, K., 1993. Biophysical conditions of the montane cloud forests of Mount Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. In: Hamilton, L.S., Juvik, J.O., Scatena, F.N. (Eds.), Proceedings of International Symposium of Tropical Montane Cloud Forests. East-West Center, Hawaii, pp. 115-124.
31. Kitayama K. Patterns of species diversity on an oceanic versus a continental island mountain: a hypothesis on species diversification. J. Veg. Sci. 7:1996;879-888
32. Lamberson R.H., Noon B.R., Voss C., McKelvey R. Reserve design for territorial species: the effects of patch size and spacing on the viability of the Northern Spotted Owl. Conserv. Biol. 8:1994;186-195
33. Lathrop R.G., Bognar J.A. Applying GIS and landscape ecological principles to evaluate land conservation alternatives. Landsc. Urban Planning. 41:1998;27-41
34. Lindenmayer D.B., Cunningham R.B., Donnelly C.F., Lesslie R. On the use of landscape surrogates as ecological indicators in fragmented forests. For. Ecol. Manage. 159:1999;203-216
35. Maikhuri R.K., Nautiyal S., Rao K.S., Chandrasekhar K., Gavali R., Saxena K.G. Analysis and resolution of protected area-people conflicts in Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve. India. Env. Conserv. 27(1):2000;43-53
36. Malczewski J. A GIS-based approach to multiple criteria group decision making. Int. J. Geog. Info. Sys. 10:1996;955-971
37. Malczewski, J., 1999. GIS and Multicriteria Decision Analysis. John Wiley and Sons, New York.
38. Malczewski J., Moreno-Sanchez R., Bojorquez-Tapia L.A., Ongay-Delhumeau Multiple criteria group decision making model for environmental conflict analysis in the Cape Region. Mexico. J. Environ. Planning Manage. 40:1997;349-374
39. Mariuki J.N., De Klerk H.M., Williams P.H., Bennun L.A., Crowe T.M., Berge E.V. Using patterns of distribution and diversity of Kenyan birds to select and prioritize areas for conservation. Biodivers. Conserv. 6:1997;191-210
40. Massam B.H. Multi-criteria decision making techniques in planning. Prog. Planning. 30:1988;1-84
41. Mrosek T. Developing and testing of a method for the analysis and assessment of multiple use from a forest conservation perspective. For. Ecol. Manage. 140:2001;65-74
42. Myers N., Mittermeier R., Mittermeier C., da Fonseca G., Kent J. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature. 403:2000;853-858
43. Nakamura, T., 1992. Integrated Research on Mangrove Ecosystems in Pacific Islands Region. International Association for Mangrove, Tokyo.
44. Olson D., Dinerstein E. The Global 200: a representation approach to conserving the earth's most biologically valuable ecoregions. Conserv. Biol. 12(3):1998;502-515
45. Payne, J., 1996. A Field Guide to the Mammals of Borneo. World Wildlife Fund for Nature. Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur.
46. Pearce, D., Brown, K., Swanson, T., Perrings, C., 1993. Economics and the Conservation of Biological Diversity. Report to the Global Environment Facility, Centre for Social and Economic Research on the Global Environment. University College, London.
47. Pereira J.M.C., Duckstein L. A multiple criteria decision making approach to GIS-based land suitability evaluation. Int. J. Geog. Info. Sys. 7(5):1993;407-424
48. Phua M.-H., Minowa M. Evaluation of environmental functions of tropical forest in Kinabalu Park, Sabah, Malaysia using GIS and remote sensing techniques: implications to forest conservation planning. J. For. Res. 5:2000;123-131
49. Phua, M.-H., Tsuyuki, S., 2004. Deforestation detection in Kinabalu Area, Sabah, Malaysia by using multi-sensor remote sensing approach. J. For. Planning, in press.
50. Primack, R.B., 1993. Essential of Conservation Biology. Sinauer Associates Inc. Sunderland, Massachusetts.
51. Pykalainen J., Kangas J., Loikkanen T. Interactive decision analysis in participatory strategic forest planning: experiences from state owned boreal forests. J. For. Econ. 5(3):1999;341-364
52. Rubino M.J., Hess G.R. Planning open spaces for wildlife 2: modeling and verifying focal species habitat. Landsc. Urban Planning. 64:2003;89-104
53. Saaty, T., 1980. The Analytical Hierarchy Process. McGraw-Hill, Suffolk.
54. Sabah Forestry Department, 1989. Forestry in Sabah. Sabah Forestry Department, Kota Kinabalu, Sabah.
55. Sanjay K., Weber K.E. A buffer zone for biodiversity conservation: viability of the concept in Nepal's Royal Chitwan National Park. Environ. Conserv. 21:1994;333-341
56. Schonewald-Cox, C.M., 1983. Guidelines to management: a beginning attempt. In: Schonewald-cox, C.M., Chambers, S.M., Macbryde, B., Thomas L. (Eds.), Ecosystem Management for Parks and Wilderness. University of Washington, Seattle, pp. 135-144.
57. Scott J.M., Davis F., Csuti B., Noss R., Butterfield B., Groves C., Anderson H., Caicco S., D'Erchia F., Edwards T.C., Ulliman J., Wright R.G. Gap analysis: a geographic approach to protection of biological diversity. Wildlife Monogr. 123:1993;1-41
58. Senes G., Toccolini A. Sustainable land use planning in protected rural areas in Italy. Landsc. Urban Planning. 41:1998;107-117
59. Sierra R., Campos F., Chamberlin J. Assessing biodiversity conservation priorities: ecosystem risk and representativeness in continental Ecuador. Landsc. Urban Planning. 59:2002;95-110
60. Smallwood K.S., Wilcox B., Leidy R., Yarris K. Indicators assessment for habitat conservation plan of Yolo County, California. USA. Environ. Manage. 22(6):1998;947-958
61. Smith V.K., Theberge J.B. A review of criteria for evaluating natural areas. Environ. Manage. 10:1986;715-734
62. Spies T.A., Ripple W.J., Bradshaw G.A. Dynamics and pattern of a managed coniferous forest landscape in Oregon. Ecol. Applic. 4(3):1994;555-568
63. Stredansky, J., 1994. Vegetation in the landscape. In: Dvorak, J., Novak, L. (Eds.), Soil Conservation and Silviculture. Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 318-348.
64. Tkach R.J., Simonovic S.P. A new approach to multi-criteria decision making in water resources. J. Geog. Info. Decision Analy. 1:1997;25-43
65. Van Huylenbroeck G., Coppens A. Multicriteria analysis of the conflicts between rural development scenarios in the Gordon District. Scotland. J. Environ. Planning Manage. 38:1995;393-407
66. Villa F., Ceroni M., Mazza A. A GIS-based method for multi-objective evaluation of park vegetation. Landsc. Urban Planning. 35:1996;203-212
67. Vuilleumier S., Prelaz-Droux R. Map of ecological networks for landscape planning. Landsc. Urban Planning. 58:2002;157-170
68. Well M.P., Brandon K.E. The pinciples and practice of buffer zones and local participation in biodiversity conservation. Ambio. 22:1993;157-162
69. Williams, P.H., 1998. Key sites for conservation: area-selection methods for biodiversity. In: Mace, G.M., Balmford A., Ginsberg, J.R. (Eds.), Conservation in a Changing World. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 211-249.
70. Yeh A.G., Li X. Sustainable land development model for rapid growth areas using GIS. Int. J. Geog. Info. Sys. 12:1998;169-189
71. Yoshida S., Tanaka K. Forest landscape biodiversity measurement by land use diversity index. J. For. Planning. 7:2001;95-102
72. Zeleny, M., 1982. Multiple Criteria Decision Making. McGraw-Hill, New York.