IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v128y2021ics1389934121000812.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Building Pareto Frontiers under tree-level forest planning using airborne laser scanning, growth models and spatial optimization

Author

Listed:
  • Pascual, Adrián

Abstract

This article evaluates the conflicts between spatial, production and financial goals using tree-level decision-support built from stand dynamics equations, airborne laser scanning data and optimization based on mixed integer programming. The resulting Pareto Frontiers evaluated the role of spatial goals to create compact treatment areas along the 10-year forest plan composed of two periods. The weight of spatial goals was progressively increased to quantify the trade-offs towards (1) financial performance, (2) timber production, (3) clustering of harvesting decisions and (4) the Hart-Becking stand density index computed at tree-level using regions derived from ALS. The proposed framework was illustrated in pine forest located in Central Spain using tree-level inventory. The proposed tree selection method was feasible and provided results fast to support operational decision-making. Proved feasibility of the tree selection method optimization allowed the fast PF computation. The results showed the benefit of increasing the weight of spatial goals up to 20–40% to promote the clustering of tree harvests. The observed reduction of financial revenues from increasing priority to spatial clustering paid off, financially and operationally, considering the possible implementation of solutions, which were very dispersed when fully maximizing revenues or benefit. The assimilation of the Pareto Frontier supported with robust optimization contributes to improve forest management planning efficiency. This article turns tree-level decision making into contemporary by integrating multi-temporal decisions, using multi-objective scenarios to assess preferences, and making use of ALS technology as the vector to transform forest data into management decisions.

Suggested Citation

  • Pascual, Adrián, 2021. "Building Pareto Frontiers under tree-level forest planning using airborne laser scanning, growth models and spatial optimization," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 128(C).
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:128:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121000812
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102475
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934121000812
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2021.102475?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. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2008. "How are preferences revealed?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1787-1794, August.
    2. Mikael Rönnqvist & Sophie D’Amours & Andres Weintraub & Alejandro Jofre & Eldon Gunn & Robert Haight & David Martell & Alan Murray & Carlos Romero, 2015. "Operations Research challenges in forestry: 33 open problems," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 232(1), pages 11-40, September.
    3. Augustynczik, Andrey Lessa Derci & Arce, Julio Eduardo & Yousefpour, Rasoul & da Silva, Arinei Carlos Lindbeck, 2016. "Promoting harvesting stands connectivity and its economic implications in Brazilian forest plantations applying integer linear programming and simulated annealing," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 120-129.
    4. Beshears, John & Choi, James J. & Laibson, David & Madrian, Brigitte C., 2008. "How are preferences revealed?," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 92(8-9), pages 1787-1794, August.
    5. Martell, David L. & Gunn, Eldon A. & Weintraub, Andres, 1998. "Forest management challenges for operational researchers," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 104(1), pages 1-17, January.
    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. Pascual, Adrián & Guerra-Hernández, Juan, 2022. "Spatial connectivity in tree-level decision-support models using mathematical optimization and individual tree mapping," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 139(C).
    2. González-González, José Mario & Vázquez-Méndez, Miguel Ernesto & Diéguez-Aranda, Ulises, 2022. "Multi-objective models for the forest harvest scheduling problem in a continuous-time framework," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(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. Leonhard K. Lades & Liam Delaney, 2024. "Self-control failures, as judged by themselves," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-14, December.
    2. van Hoorn, André, 2018. "Is the happiness approach to measuring preferences valid?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 53-65.
    3. Ghosal, Sayantan & Dalton, Patricio, 2013. "Characterizing Behavioral Decisions with Choice Data," CAGE Online Working Paper Series 107, Competitive Advantage in the Global Economy (CAGE).
    4. Henrik Serup Christensen & Lauri Rapeli, 2021. "Immediate rewards or delayed gratification? A conjoint survey experiment of the public’s policy preferences," Policy Sciences, Springer;Society of Policy Sciences, vol. 54(1), pages 63-94, March.
    5. Alserda, Gosse A.G. & Dellaert, Benedict G.C. & Swinkels, Laurens & van der Lecq, Fieke S.G., 2019. "Individual pension risk preference elicitation and collective asset allocation with heterogeneity," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 101(C), pages 206-225.
    6. Hasan-Basri, Bakti & Yahya, Nurul & Musa, Rusmani, 2013. "Status Quo Effect and Preferences Uncertainty: A Heteroscedastic Extreme Value (HEV) Model," Jurnal Ekonomi Malaysia, Faculty of Economics and Business, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, vol. 47(1), pages 163-172.
    7. Hajdu, Tamás & Hajdu, Gábor, 2011. "A hasznosság és a relatív jövedelem kapcsolatának vizsgálata magyar adatok segítségével [Examining the relation of utility and relative income using Hungarian data]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 56-73.
    8. Yildiz, Özgür, 2014. "Lehren aus der Verhaltensökonomik für die Gestaltung umweltpolitischer Maßnahmen [Lessons from behavioral economics for the design of environmental policy measures]," MPRA Paper 59360, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    9. Orla Doyle & Liam Delaney & Christine O'Farrelly & Nick Fitzpatrick & Michael Daly, 2015. "Can Early Intervention Improve Maternal Well-being? Evidence from a Randomized Controlled Trial," Working Papers 2015-015, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    10. Belton, Cameron A. & Lunn, Peter D., 2020. "Smart choices? An experimental study of smart meters and time-of-use tariffs in Ireland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 140(C).
    11. Monika Bütler & Eva Deuchert & Michael Lechner & Stefan Staubli & Petra Thiemann, 2015. "Financial work incentives for disability benefit recipients: lessons from a randomised field experiment," IZA Journal of Labor Policy, Springer;Forschungsinstitut zur Zukunft der Arbeit GmbH (IZA), vol. 4(1), pages 1-18, December.
    12. Stefania Sitzia & Jiwei Zheng & Daniel Zizzo, 2015. "Inattentive consumers in markets for services," Theory and Decision, Springer, vol. 79(2), pages 307-332, September.
    13. Hazel Bateman & Christine Eckert & Fedor Iskhakov & Jordan Louviere & Stephen Satchell & Susan Thorp, 2017. "Default and naive diversification heuristics in annuity choice," Australian Journal of Management, Australian School of Business, vol. 42(1), pages 32-57, February.
    14. Martin Binder & Leonhard K. Lades, 2015. "Autonomy-Enhancing Paternalism," Kyklos, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 68(1), pages 3-27, February.
    15. Francesca de Petrillo & Alexandra Rosati, 2021. "Variation in primate decision-making under uncertainty and the roots of human economic behaviour," Post-Print hal-03151858, HAL.
    16. Johannes Lohse & Timo Goeschl & Johannes H. Diederich, 2017. "Giving is a Question of Time: Response Times and Contributions to an Environmental Public Good," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 67(3), pages 455-477, July.
    17. Attema, Arthur E. & Brouwer, Werner B.F., 2013. "In search of a preferred preference elicitation method: A test of the internal consistency of choice and matching tasks," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 39(C), pages 126-140.
    18. Jaehwuen Jung & Hyungsoo Lim & Dongwon Lee & Chul Kim, 2022. "The Secret to Finding a Match: A Field Experiment on Choice Capacity Design in an Online Dating Platform," Information Systems Research, INFORMS, vol. 33(4), pages 1248-1263, December.
    19. V. Smith & Eric Moore, 2010. "Behavioral Economics and Benefit Cost Analysis," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 46(2), pages 217-234, June.
    20. Leites, Martín & Rivero, Analía & Salas, Gonzalo, 2024. "The positionality of goods and the positional concern’s origin," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 109(C).

    More about this item

    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:128:y:2021:i:c:s1389934121000812. 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.