Aggregation of preferences in participatory forest planning with multiple criteria: An application to the urban forest in Lycksele, Sweden

Canadian Journal of Forest Research

Volumn 39, Issue 10, 2009, Pages 1979-1992

  Nordström, Eva Maria ^a   Romero, Carlos ^b   Eriksson, Ljusk Ola ^a   Öhman, Karin ^a  

^a SWEDISH UNIVERSITY OF AGRICULTURAL SCIENCES   (Sweden)

^b UNIVERSIDAD POLITÉCNICA DE MADRID   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

COLLECTIVE PREFERENCE; CONSENSUS SOLUTIONS; CONTROL PARAMETERS; DISTANCE METRICS; FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANNING; FOREST MANAGEMENT PLANS; FOREST PLANNING; GROUP DECISION MAKING; MULTIPLE CRITERIA; MULTIPLE CRITERIA DECISION MAKING; PAIR-WISE COMPARISON; SOCIAL GROUPS; URBAN FORESTS;

CONTROL SYSTEM ANALYSIS; FORESTRY; MANAGEMENT SCIENCE; PLANNING;

DECISION MAKING;

DECISION MAKING; ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PLANNING PRACTICE; STAKEHOLDER; URBAN DESIGN; URBAN FORESTRY;

CONTROL SYSTEMS; DECISION MAKING; FOREST MANAGEMENT; FORESTRY; PLANNING; SWEDEN;

EURASIA; EUROPE; LYCKSELE; NORTHERN EUROPE; SCANDINAVIA; SWEDEN; VASTERBOTTEN;

EID: 70350168817     PISSN: 00455067     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1139/X09-107     Document Type: Article

References (33)

1. André, F.J., and Romero, C. 2008. Computing compromise solutions: on the connections between compromise programming and composite programming. Appl. Math. Comput. 195(1): 1-10. doi:10.1016/j.amc.2007.04.064.
2. Belton, V., and Pictet, J. 1997. A framework for group decision using a MCDA model: Sharing, aggregating or comparing individual information? Revue des Systèmes de Décision, 6(3): 283-303.
3. Belton, V., and Stewart, T.J. 2002. Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis - an integrated approach. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
4. Bryson, N.K.M., and Joseph, A. 1999. Generating consensus priority point vectors: a logarithmic goal programming approach. Comput. Oper. Res. 26(6): 637-643. doi:10.1016/S0305-0548(98)00083-5.
5. Cho, Y.-G., and Cho, K.-T. 2008. A loss function approach to group preference aggregation in the AHP. Comput. Oper. Res. 35(3): 884-892. doi:10.1016/j.cor.2006.04.008.
6. Diaz-Balteiro, L., and Romero, C. 2008. Making forestry decisions with multiple criteria: a review and an assessment. For. Ecol. Manage. 255(8-9): 3222-3241. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2008.01.038.
7. Dyer, R.F., and Forman, E.H. 1992. Group decision support with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Decis. Support Syst. 8(2): 99-124. doi:10.1016/0167-9236(92)90003-8.
8. Eko, P.M. 1985. En produktionsmodell for skog i Sverige, baserad på bestånd från riksskogstaxeringens provytor (A growth simulator for Swedish forests, based on data from the national forest survey). Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Silviculture, Report No. 16. Umeå, Sweden.
9. Eriksson, L.O. 1983. Timber class formation by cluster analysis. Swedish University of Agricultural Sciences, Department of Forest Technology, Report No. 157. Garpenberg, Sweden.
10. Escobar, M., and Moreno-Jiménez, J. 2007. Aggregation of individual preference structures in Ahp-group decision making. Group Decis. Negot. 16(4): 287-301. doi:10.1007/s10726-006-9050-x.
11. Forman, E., and Peniwati, K. 1998. Aggregating individual judgments and priorities with the Analytic Hierarchy Process. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 108(1): 165-169. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(97)00244-0.
12. González-Pachón, J., and Romero, C. 1999. Distance-based consensus methods: a goal programming approach. Omega Int. J. 27(3): 341-347. doi:10.1016/S0305-0483(98)00052-8.
13. González-Pachón, J., and Romero, C. 2004. A method for dealing with inconsistencies in pairwise comparisons. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 158(2): 351-361. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2003.06.009.
14. González-Pachón, J., and Romero, C. 2007. Inferring consensus weights from pairwise comparison matrices without suitable properties. Ann. Oper. Res. 154(1): 123-132. doi:10.1007/s10479-007-0182-4.
15. Hiltunen, V., Kangas, J., and Pykälainen, J. 2008. Voting methods in strategic forest planning - experiences from Metsähallitus. For. Policy Econ. 10(3): 117-127.
16. Hoen, H.F., and Eid, T. 1990. En modell for analyse av behan-dlingsstrategier for en skog ved bestandssimulering og lineær programmering. Rapport/Norsk institutt for skogforskning -NISK, 90:9, A °s.
17. Johansson, A. 2001. Skogsbrukets kostnader och intakter 2000: Ett år med vind och vatten. Resultat No. 7. SkogForsk, Uppsala, Sweden.
18. Keeney, R.L. 1992. Value-focused thinking - a path to creative decision making. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
19. Linares, P. 2009. Are inconsistent decisions better? An experiment with pairwise comparisons. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 193(2): 492-498. doi:10.1016/j.ejor.2007.11.030.
20. Munda, G. 2004. Social multicriteria evaluation: methodological foundations and operational consequences. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 158(3): 662-677. doi:10.1016/S0377-2217(03)00369-2.
21. Nurminen, T., Korpunen, H., and Uusitalo, J. 2006. Time consump-tion analysis of the mechanized cut-to-length harvesting system. Silva Fenn. 40(2): 335-363.
22. Ollas, R. 1980. Nya utbytesfunktioner for trad och bestånd (New yield functions for trees and stands). Forskningsstiftelsen Skog-sarbeten, Ekonomi No. 5. Stockholm. [In Swedish.]
23. Ramanathan, R., and Ganesh, L.S. 1994. Group-preference aggregation methods employed in AHP - an evaluation and an intrinsic process for deriving members weightages. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 79(2): 249-265. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(94)90356-5.
24. Rydberg, D., and Falck, J. 2000. Urban forestry in Sweden from a silvicultural perspective: a review. Landsc. Urban Plan. 47(1-2): 1-18. doi:10.1016/S0169-2046(99)00068-7.
25. Saaty, T.L. 1977. A scaling method for priorities in hierarchical structures. J. Math. Psychol. 15(3): 234-281. doi:10.1016/0022-2496(77)90033-5.
26. Saaty, T.L. 1990. The analytic hierarchy process: planning, priority setting, resource allocation. RWS Publications, Pittsburgh, Pa.
27. Salo, A.A. 1995. Interactive decision aiding for group decision support. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 84(1): 134-149. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(94)00322-4.
28. Sheppard, S.R.J., and Meitner, M. 2005. Using multicriteria analysis and visualisation for sustainable forest management planning with stakeholder groups. For. Ecol. Manage. 207(1-2): 171-187. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2004.10.032.
29. SNBF. 1994. Swedish forestry act. Swedish National Board of Forestry (SNBF), Jonkoping, Sweden.
30. Van Den Honert, R.C., and Lootsma, F.A. 1997. Group preference aggregation in the multiplicative AHP The model of the group decision process and Pareto optimality. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 96(2): 363-370. doi:10.1016/0377-2217(95)00345-2.
31. von Winterfeldt, D., and Edwards, W. 1986. Decision analysis and behavioral research. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, Mass.
32. Yu, P.L. 1973. A class of solutions for group decision problems. Manage. Sci. 19(8): 936-946. doi:10.1287/mnsc.19.8.936.
33. Zeleny, M. 1982. Multiple criteria decision making. McGraw-Hill, New York.