IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v21y2012icp81-91.html

Evaluation of harvesting methods for Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) using the Analytical Network Process (ANP)

Author

Listed:
  • Ghajar, Ismael
  • Najafi, Akbar

Abstract

Forest harvesting is a basic component of Sustainable Forest Management (SFM). Consideration of all aspects of harvesting operations in an effort to improve forest practices requires an approach that first addresses multiple criteria and incorporates a wide range of data. Second, the approach should provide a framework to evaluate both quantitative and qualitative criteria. In this study, the Analytical Network Process (ANP) is utilized to evaluate three existing harvesting methods by integrating the main components of the FAO Model Code of Harvesting Practice as an international mechanism for local management. The ANP framework helps forest managers to prioritize all alternatives and criteria with respect to each other and to develop their corresponding preferences. This study is an analysis of the environmental, economic, and social context of harvesting operations with the goal of making forest practices more sustainable and leading forest utilization to SFM. Although the criteria are calibrated for Caspian forests (northern Iran), the key principles applied here can be used or developed in other countries or regions.

Suggested Citation

  • Ghajar, Ismael & Najafi, Akbar, 2012. "Evaluation of harvesting methods for Sustainable Forest Management (SFM) using the Analytical Network Process (ANP)," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 81-91.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:21:y:2012:i:c:p:81-91
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112000056
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.01.003?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

    for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Thomas L. Saaty & Luis G. Vargas, 2006. "Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research and Management Science, Springer, number 978-0-387-33987-0, February.
    2. Erdogmus, Senol & Aras, Haydar & Koç, Eylem, 2006. "Evaluation of alternative fuels for residential heating in Turkey using analytic network process (ANP) with group decision-making," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 10(3), pages 269-279, June.
    3. Thomas L. Saaty, 2006. "The Analytic Network Process," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process, chapter 0, pages 1-26, Springer.
    4. Niemira, Michael P. & Saaty, Thomas L., 2004. "An Analytic Network Process model for financial-crisis forecasting," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 20(4), pages 573-587.
    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. Abotaleb Salehnasab & Harold E. Burkhart & Mahmoud Bayat & Bagher Khaleghi & Sahar Heidari & Hafiz Umair Masood Awan, 2022. "Projection Matrix Models: A Suitable Approach for Predicting Sustainable Growth in Uneven-Aged and Mixed Hyrcanian Forests," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-17, June.
    2. Pei-Hsuan Tsai & Chin-Tsai Lin, 2018. "How Should National Museums Create Competitive Advantage Following Changes in the Global Economic Environment?," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-20, October.
    3. Jaafari, Abolfazl & Najafi, Akbar & Melón, Mónica García, 2015. "Decision-making for the selection of a best wood extraction method: An analytic network process approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 200-209.

    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.
    1. Jaafari, Abolfazl & Najafi, Akbar & Melón, Mónica García, 2015. "Decision-making for the selection of a best wood extraction method: An analytic network process approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 200-209.
    2. Ali Aghazadeh Ardebili & Elio Padoano & Antonella Longo & Antonio Ficarella, 2022. "The Risky-Opportunity Analysis Method (ROAM) to Support Risk-Based Decisions in a Case-Study of Critical Infrastructure Digitization," Risks, MDPI, vol. 10(3), pages 1-22, February.
    3. Ester Guijarro & Cristina Santadreu-Mascarell & Beatriz Blasco-Gallego & Lourdes Canós-Darós & Eugenia Babiloni, 2021. "On the Identification of the Key Factors for a Successful Use of Twitter as a Medium from a Social Marketing Perspective," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(12), pages 1-15, June.
    4. Babak Daneshvar Rouyendegh & Asil Oztekin & Joseph Ekong & Ali Dag, 2019. "Measuring the efficiency of hospitals: a fully-ranking DEA–FAHP approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 278(1), pages 361-378, July.
    5. Ferry Syarifuddin, 2024. "Islamic Macroprudential Policy to Support Staple Agricultural Sector Financing," Economia agro-alimentare, FrancoAngeli Editore, vol. 2024(3), pages 15-45.
    6. Clara Champalle & James D. Ford & Mya Sherman, 2015. "Prioritizing Climate Change Adaptations in Canadian Arctic Communities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 7(7), pages 1-25, July.
    7. Afsaneh Afzali & Soheil Sabri & M. Rashid & Jamal Mohammad Vali Samani & Ahmad Ludin, 2014. "Inter-Municipal Landfill Site Selection Using Analytic Network Process," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 28(8), pages 2179-2194, June.
    8. Baffoe, Gideon, 2019. "Exploring the utility of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in ranking livelihood activities for effective and sustainable rural development interventions in developing countries," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 72(C), pages 197-204.
    9. Sedigheh Meimandi Parizi & Mohammad Taleai & Ayyoob Sharifi, 2022. "A GIS-Based Multi-Criteria Analysis Framework to Evaluate Urban Physical Resilience against Earthquakes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-31, April.
    10. Reza Azimi & Abdolreza Yazdani-Chamzini & Mohammad Majid Fouladgar & Edmundas Kazimieras Zavadskas & Mohammad Hossein Basiri, 2011. "Ranking the strategies of mining sector through anp and topsis in a swot framework," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 12(4), pages 670-689, September.
    11. Reyhaneh Hashemi Sigari & Thomas Panagopoulos, 2024. "A Multicriteria Decision-Making Approach for Urban Water Features: Ecological Landscape Architecture Evaluation," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(11), pages 1-20, October.
    12. Daniel Toth & Jaroslava Janků & Adéla Marie Marhoul & Josef Kozák & Mansoor Maitah & Jan Jehlička & Lukáš Řeháček & Richard Přikryl & Tomáš Herza & Jan Vopravil & David Kincl & Tomáš Khel, 2023. "Soil quality assessment using SAS (Soil Assessment System)," Soil and Water Research, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 18(1), pages 1-15.
    13. Nikola Kadoić & Nina Begičević Ređep & Blaženka Divjak, 2018. "A new method for strategic decision-making in higher education," Central European Journal of Operations Research, Springer;Slovak Society for Operations Research;Hungarian Operational Research Society;Czech Society for Operations Research;Österr. Gesellschaft für Operations Research (ÖGOR);Slovenian Society Informatika - Section for Operational Research;Croatian Operational Research Society, vol. 26(3), pages 611-628, September.
    14. Fuat Sekmen & Isa Demirkol & Haşmet Gökırmak, 2024. "Evaluation of urban transportation preferences with analytical hierarchy process method," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 58(3), pages 2087-2101, June.
    15. Chi-Yo Huang & Pei-Han Chung & Joseph Z. Shyu & Yao-Hua Ho & Chao-Hsin Wu & Ming-Che Lee & Ming-Jenn Wu, 2018. "Evaluation and Selection of Materials for Particulate Matter MEMS Sensors by Using Hybrid MCDM Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-35, September.
    16. Oryani, Bahareh & Koo, Yoonmo & Rezania, Shahabaldin & Shafiee, Afsaneh, 2021. "Barriers to renewable energy technologies penetration: Perspective in Iran," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 174(C), pages 971-983.
    17. Ravi Kumar Gedela & K. Krishna Mohan & V. Kamakshi Prasad, 2018. "Application of BOCR models in service oriented architecture (SOA): study on model validation through quantification for QoS considerations," International Journal of System Assurance Engineering and Management, Springer;The Society for Reliability, Engineering Quality and Operations Management (SREQOM),India, and Division of Operation and Maintenance, Lulea University of Technology, Sweden, vol. 9(6), pages 1346-1354, December.
    18. Roberto Cervelló-Royo & Marina Segura & Regina García-Pérez & Baldomero Segura-García del Río, 2021. "An Analysis of Preferences in Housing Demand by Means of a Multicriteria Methodology (AHP). A More Sustainable Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    19. Jing-Wei Liu & Che-Wei Chang & Yao-Ji Wang & Yi-Hui Liu, 2022. "Constructing a Decision Model for Health Club Members to Purchase Coaching Programs during the COVID-19 Epidemic," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-13, October.
    20. Patricija Bajec & Danijela Tuljak-Suban, 2022. "A Strategic Approach for Promoting Sustainable Crowdshipping in Last-Mile Deliveries," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-17, October.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    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:eee:forpol:v:21:y:2012:i:c:p:81-91. 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: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/forpol .

    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.