IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/caa/jnljfs/v59y2013i12id45-2013-jfs.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Selecting the efficient harvesting method using multiple-criteria analysis: A case study in south-west Western Australia

Author

Listed:
  • M.R. Ghaffariyan

    (Australian Forest Operations Research Alliance (AFORA), University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore DC, Australia)

  • M. Brown

    (Australian Forest Operations Research Alliance (AFORA), University of the Sunshine Coast, Maroochydore DC, Australia)

Abstract

Different factors can impact on the timber harvesting methods including stand characteristics, ground conditions, extraction distance, climate, silvicultural treatments and social interests. The multiple-criteria analysis is an effective methodology for helping foresters decide what system to apply depending on their operations specifications. Four harvesting methods were compared in Western Australian Eucalypt plantations including cut-to-length (CTL), in-field chipping using a delimbing and debarking flail integrated with the chipper (IFC-DDC), in-field chipping using a chipper with a separate flail machine for delimbing and debarking (IFC-F/C) and whole tree to roadside (WTR). The decision criterions consisted of total operating cost (from stand to mill gate), yield per ha, harvesting residues, fuel consumption and bark content of the chips. The Promethee method was used to evaluate the alternatives using Decision Lab software. Based on the results, the IFC-DCC was the best harvest method while WTR method was the worst harvesting alternative in the case study area. IFC-DCC method resulted in the lowest operating cost and the highest recovered yield per ha compared to the other harvesting methods.

Suggested Citation

  • M.R. Ghaffariyan & M. Brown, 2013. "Selecting the efficient harvesting method using multiple-criteria analysis: A case study in south-west Western Australia," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(12), pages 479-486.
    • Handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:59:y:2013:i:12:id:45-2013-jfs
    DOI: 10.17221/45/2013-JFS
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/45/2013-JFS.html
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: http://jfs.agriculturejournals.cz/doi/10.17221/45/2013-JFS.pdf
    Download Restriction: free of charge
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.17221/45/2013-JFS?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. M.R. Ghaffariyan, 2013. "Comparing productivity-cost of roadside processing system and road side chipping system in Western Australia," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 59(5), pages 204-210.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. M.R. Ghaffariyan, 2016. "Analysis of forestry work accidents in five Australian forest companies for the period 2004 to 2014," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(12), pages 545-552.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:caa:jnljfs:v:59:y:2013:i:12:id:45-2013-jfs. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Ivo Andrle (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.cazv.cz/en/home/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.