IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jlands/v10y2021i7p747-d595979.html

A Participatory and Spatial Multicriteria Decision Approach to Prioritize the Allocation of Ecosystem Services to Management Units

Author

Listed:
  • Marlene Marques

    (Forest Research Center and Laboratory Terra, School of Agriculture, University of Lisbon, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Keith M. Reynolds

    (Corvallis Forestry Sciences Laboratory, Pacific Northwest Research Station, US Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, 3200 SW Jefferson Way, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA)

  • Susete Marques

    (Forest Research Center and Laboratory Terra, School of Agriculture, University of Lisbon, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Marco Marto

    (Forest Research Center and Laboratory Terra, School of Agriculture, University of Lisbon, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal)

  • Steve Paplanus

    (Mountain View Business Group, 428 Flying Orchid Dr, San Marcos, TX 78666, USA)

  • José G. Borges

    (Forest Research Center and Laboratory Terra, School of Agriculture, University of Lisbon, Tapada da Ajuda, 1349-017 Lisboa, Portugal)

Abstract

Forest management planning can be challenging when allocating multiple ecosystem services (ESs) to management units (MUs), given the potentially conflicting management priorities of actors. We developed a methodology to spatially allocate ESs to MUs, according to the objectives of four interest groups—civil society, forest owners, market agents, and public administration. We applied a Group Multicriteria Spatial Decision Support System approach, combining (a) Multicriteria Decision Analysis to weight the decision models; (b) a focus group and a multicriteria Pareto frontier method to negotiate a consensual solution for seven ESs; and (c) the Ecosystem Management Decision Support (EMDS) system to prioritize the allocation of ESs to MUs. We report findings from an application to a joint collaborative management area (ZIF of Vale do Sousa) in northwestern Portugal. The forest owners selected wood production as the first ES allocation priority, with lower priorities for other ESs. In opposition, the civil society assigned the highest allocation priorities to biodiversity, cork, and carbon stock, with the lowest priority being assigned to wood production. The civil society had the highest mean rank of allocation priority scores. We found significant differences in priority scores between the civil society and the other three groups, highlighting the civil society and market agents as the most discordant groups. We spatially evaluated potential for conflicts among group ESs allocation priorities. The findings suggest that this approach can be helpful to decision makers, increasing the effectiveness of forest management plan implementation.

Suggested Citation

  • Marlene Marques & Keith M. Reynolds & Susete Marques & Marco Marto & Steve Paplanus & José G. Borges, 2021. "A Participatory and Spatial Multicriteria Decision Approach to Prioritize the Allocation of Ecosystem Services to Management Units," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(7), pages 1-22, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:747-:d:595979
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/747/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2073-445X/10/7/747/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Jacek Malczewski, 2010. "Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis and Geographic Information Systems," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Matthias Ehrgott & José Rui Figueira & Salvatore Greco (ed.), Trends in Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis, chapter 0, pages 369-395, Springer.
    2. Keith M. Reynolds & Philip J. Murphy & Steven Paplanus, 2017. "Toward Geodesign for Watershed Restoration on the Fremont-Winema National Forest, Pacific Northwest, USA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(5), pages 1-19, April.
    3. Susete Marques & Marco Marto & Vladimir Bushenkov & Marc McDill & JoséG. Borges, 2017. "Addressing Wildfire Risk in Forest Management Planning with Multiple Criteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(2), pages 1-17, February.
    4. Marques, Marlene & Juerges, Nataly & Borges, José G., 2020. "Appraisal framework for actor interest and power analysis in forest management - Insights from Northern Portugal," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 111(C).
    5. David Uribe & Davide Geneletti & Rafael F. Del Castillo & Francesco Orsi, 2014. "Integrating Stakeholder Preferences and GIS-Based Multicriteria Analysis to Identify Forest Landscape Restoration Priorities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 6(2), pages 1-17, February.
    6. Brigite Botequim & Miguel N. Bugalho & Ana Raquel Rodrigues & Susete Marques & Marco Marto & José G. Borges, 2021. "Combining Tree Species Composition and Understory Coverage Indicators with Optimization Techniques to Address Concerns with Landscape-Level Biodiversity," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-26, January.
    7. Kangas, A. & Saarinen, N. & Saarikoski, H. & Leskinen, L.A. & Hujala, T. & Tikkanen, J., 2010. "Stakeholder perspectives about proper participation for Regional Forest Programmes in Finland," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 213-222, March.
    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. Jan Kašpar & Zohreh Mohammadi & Meryem Tahri, 2026. "Evaluation of selected forest ecosystem services in forest management planning using multi-criteria decision analysis: A pilot study in the Czech Republic," Journal of Forest Science, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 72(6), pages 308-321.
    2. Valente, Marieta & Fernandes, Maria Eduarda & Pinto, Lígia Maria Costa, 2024. "Crowdfunding or crowdsourcing time: Exploring the willingness of private citizens to help prevent forest fires," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    3. Afsar, Bekir & Silvennoinen, Johanna & Eyvindson, Kyle & Miettinen, Kaisa & Ovaskainen, Otso, 2026. "Identifying key components for multiobjective forest management decisions: A case study of state-owned Finnish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    4. Anastasia Mirli & Thomas Bakas & Dionissis Latinopoulos & Ifigenia Kagalou & Mike Spiliotis, 2024. "Participatory Management of a Mediterranean Lagoon Complex Social-Ecological System Using Intuitionistic Fuzzy TOPSIS," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(23), pages 1-21, December.
    5. Milena Lakicevic & Bojan Srdjevic, 2022. "An Approach to Developing the Multicriteria Optimal Forest Management Plan: The “Fruska Gora” National Park Case Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(10), pages 1-14, September.
    6. John, Manuel & Wirth, Kristina & Kaufmann, Anna & Ertelt, Hannah & Frei, Theresa, 2024. "Forest deliberations: Marteloscopes as sites of encounter between climate activists and forest managers," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).

    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. Talpă, Nicolae & Nichiforel, Liviu & Hălălișan, Aureliu-Florin & Indreica, Adrian & Păcurar, Victor Dan & Bouriaud, Laura & Barnoaiea, Ionuț & Drăgoi, Marian & Enescu, Cristian Mihai & Popa, Bogdan, 2026. "Science-policy interface in participatory reforms: Integrating forest governance principles into Romania's forestry strategy," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    2. Brigite Botequim & Miguel N. Bugalho & Ana Raquel Rodrigues & Susete Marques & Marco Marto & José G. Borges, 2021. "Combining Tree Species Composition and Understory Coverage Indicators with Optimization Techniques to Address Concerns with Landscape-Level Biodiversity," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(2), pages 1-26, January.
    3. Setiawan, Andri D. & Cuppen, Eefje, 2013. "Stakeholder perspectives on carbon capture and storage in Indonesia," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 61(C), pages 1188-1199.
    4. Deb, Madhujit & Debbarma, Bishop & Majumder, Arindam & Banerjee, Rahul, 2016. "Performance –emission optimization of a diesel-hydrogen dual fuel operation: A NSGA II coupled TOPSIS MADM approach," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 117(P1), pages 281-290.
    5. Abigail Fitzgibbon & Dan Pisut & David Fleisher, 2022. "Evaluation of Maximum Entropy (Maxent) Machine Learning Model to Assess Relationships between Climate and Corn Suitability," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-20, August.
    6. Zolfaghary, Parvin & Zakerinia, Mahdi & Kazemi, Hossein, 2021. "A model for the use of urban treated wastewater in agriculture using multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) and geographic information system (GIS)," Agricultural Water Management, Elsevier, vol. 243(C).
    7. Joanna Jaroszewicz & Anna Majewska, 2021. "Group Spatial Preferences of Residential Locations—Simplified Method Based on Crowdsourced Spatial Data and MCDA," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-24, April.
    8. Edgar Lorenzo-Sáez & Jose-Vicente Oliver-Villanueva & Victoria Lerma-Arce & Celia Yagüe-Hurtado & Lenin Guillermo Lemus-Zúñiga, 2021. "Potential Analysis of Mediterranean Forestry for Offsetting GHG Emissions at Regional Level: Evidence from Valencia, Spain," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(8), pages 1-17, April.
    9. Barbara Pavani-Biju & José G. Borges & Susete Marques & Ana C. Teodoro, 2024. "Enhancing Forest Site Classification in Northwest Portugal: A Geostatistical Approach Employing Cokriging," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 16(15), pages 1-21, July.
    10. Ceren Erdin & Halil Emre Akbaş, 2019. "A Comparative Analysis of Fuzzy TOPSIS and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) for the Location Selection of Shopping Malls: A Case Study from Turkey," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(14), pages 1-22, July.
    11. Mengistie Kindu & Logan Robert Bingham & José G. Borges & Susete Marques & Olha Nahorna & Jeannette Eggers & Thomas Knoke, 2022. "Opportunity Costs of In Situ Carbon Storage Derived by Multiple-Objective Stand-Level Optimization—Results from Case Studies in Portugal and Germany," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-12, November.
    12. Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Iglesias-Merchan & Carlos Romero & Silvestre García de Jalón, 2020. "The Sustainable Management of Land and Fisheries Resources Using Multicriteria Techniques: A Meta-Analysis," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(10), pages 1-18, October.
    13. Amir Reza Bakhshi Lomer & Mahdi Rezaeian & Hamid Rezaei & Akbar Lorestani & Naeim Mijani & Mohammadreza Mahdad & Ahmad Raeisi & Jamal Jokar Arsanjani, 2023. "Optimizing Emergency Shelter Selection in Earthquakes Using a Risk-Driven Large Group Decision-Making Support System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(5), pages 1-19, February.
    14. Juerges, Nataly & Arts, Bas & Masiero, Mauro & Hoogstra-Klein, Marjanke & Borges, José G. & Brodrechtova, Yvonne & Brukas, Vilis & Canadas, Maria João & Carvalho, Pedro Ochôa & Corradini, Giulia & Cor, 2021. "Power analysis as a tool to analyse trade-offs between ecosystem services in forest management: A case study from nine European countries," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 49(C).
    15. Kangas, Annika & Heikkilä, Juuso & Malmivaara-Lämsä, Minna & Löfström, Irja, 2014. "Case Puijo—Evaluation of a participatory urban forest planning process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(C), pages 13-23.
    16. Tikkanen, Jukka, 2018. "Participatory turn - and down-turn - in Finland's regional forest programme process," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 89(C), pages 87-97.
    17. Salomaa, Anna & Paloniemi, Riikka & Hujala, Teppo & Rantala, Salla & Arponen, Anni & Niemelä, Jari, 2016. "The use of knowledge in evidence-informed voluntary conservation of Finnish forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 90-98.
    18. Valérie Brison & Marc Pirlot, 2025. "A spatial utility model for ranking maps," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 353(1), pages 25-52, October.
    19. Urooj Saeed & Sajid Rashid Ahmad & Ghulam Mohey-ud-din & Hira Jannat Butt & Uzma Ashraf, 2022. "An Integrated Approach for Developing an Urban Livability Composite Index—A Cities’ Ranking Road Map to Achieve Urban Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-20, July.
    20. Ohmura, Tamaki & Creutzburg, Leonard & Lieberherr, Eva, 2026. "Sinking into standing forests or timber for climate change mitigation: Instrument constituencies and policy preferences," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).

    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:gam:jlands:v:10:y:2021:i:7:p:747-:d:595979. 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: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    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.