Multi-criteria evaluation of multi-purpose stand treatment programmes for Finnish boreal forests under changing climate

• Published in: Ecological indicators Vol. 8; no. 1; pp. 26 - 45
• Main Authors: Briceño-Elizondo, Elemer, Jäger, Dietmar, Lexer, Manfred J., Garcia-Gonzalo, Jordi, Peltola, Heli, Kellomäki, Seppo
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Elsevier Ltd 2008
• Subjects: Boreal forest; Climate change; Forest management; Multi-criteria analysis; Utility model; Climate change; Boreal forest; Utility model; Forest management; Multi-criteria analysis
• ISSN: 1470-160X; 1872-7034
• DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolind.2006.12.001

The aim of this study is determine the potential of multiple-criteria analysis (MCA) methodology to assess the utility of different multi-objective stand treatment programmes, in the boreal forest. Simulations over a planning period of 100 years under current and changing climate scenarios by a physiological growth model provided input data for the stochastic multi-criteria analysis of forest management alternatives. Expected utility with regard to a set of objectives was estimated with an additive utility model. Timber production, carbon sequestration and biodiversity were considered as partial objectives; these in term were represented by decision criteria. The weights of partial objectives and criteria were subjected to uncertainty due to missing exact stakeholder preference information. Generic probability distributions for individual weights were defined based on qualitative information. Alternative stand treatment programmes with regard to the decision criteria were evaluated by means of linear preference functions. In a Monte Carlo analysis the utility model was employed to evaluate eight stand treatment programmes for their performance regarding the management objectives. The effect of climate change on utility of stand treatment programmes was examined also as an important factor. Over two sites and three tree species just two out of eight stand treatment programmes analysed in this study were able to dominate the set of alternatives; namely the unthinned scenario and the highest increase in thinning thresholds scenario (UT(0, 0) and BT(+30, +30)) in which stocking was kept at higher level compared to the currently recommended guidelines for site and species. Reducing uncertainty in the utility model by assuming accurate weights for the decision criteria did not show large changes neither in expected utility nor in the ranking of alternatives. Ignoring necessary revisions of how the forest is to be managed in the future might potentially result in losses, not only for timber production but also for benefits such as carbon sequestration and other amenities including biodiversity.