IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cfe/wpcefa/2012_22.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

An eco-sustainable forest management model for the Mediterranean forests - a multiple criteria approach

Author

Listed:
  • Rui Manuel de Sousa Fragoso

    (CEFAGE)

  • Maria de Belém Ferreira da Silva Costa Freitas

    (University of Algarve, Sciences and Technology Faculty, CEFAGE-UÉ)

  • António Manuel de Sousa Xavier

    (University of Algarve, Sciences and Technology Faculty, CEFAGE-UÉ)

Abstract

The forest management of the areas in the Mediterranean basin is a problem that needs a careful solution, accounting and valorising all the economical activities that exist there and considering the fire risk decrease and the biodiversity preservation. In order to overcome this problem, this paper proposes a model that allows designing several scenarios of economical result maximization, producing biodiversity and fires risk indicators, but also achieving the best compromise result between these issues using compromise programming. The model was applied in the Forest Intervention Zone Arade-Alte/ S. B. Messines. The results were promising and provide important information, creating a complete management plan, and simulating the best compromise solution among fire risk, economical result and biodiversity, providing an added background for the analysts.

Suggested Citation

  • Rui Manuel de Sousa Fragoso & Maria de Belém Ferreira da Silva Costa Freitas & António Manuel de Sousa Xavier, 2012. "An eco-sustainable forest management model for the Mediterranean forests - a multiple criteria approach," CEFAGE-UE Working Papers 2012_22, University of Evora, CEFAGE-UE (Portugal).
    • Handle: RePEc:cfe:wpcefa:2012_22
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://api.cefage.uevora.pt/assets/b16db386-209d-4f40-b020-532234b14d55
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Luis Diaz-Balteiro & Carlos Romero, 2007. "Multiple Criteria Decision-Making in Forest Planning: Recent Results and Current Challenges," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Andres Weintraub & Carlos Romero & Trond Bjørndal & Rafael Epstein & Jaime Miranda (ed.), Handbook Of Operations Research In Natural Resources, chapter 0, pages 473-488, Springer.
    2. Ananda, Jayanath & Herath, Gamini, 2003. "Incorporating stakeholder values into regional forest planning: a value function approach," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 75-90, April.
    3. repec:cfe:wpcefa:2011_19 is not listed on IDEAS
    4. Carlos Romero, 2000. "Risk programming for agricultural resource allocation: A multidimensional risk approach," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 94(1), pages 57-68, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. de Sousa Xavier, António Manuel & Costa Freitas, Maria de Belém & de Sousa Fragoso, Rui Manuel, 2015. "Management of Mediterranean forests — A compromise programming approach considering different stakeholders and different objectives," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 38-46.
    2. Fancello, Giovanna & Tsoukiàs, Alexis, 2021. "Learning urban capabilities from behaviours. A focus on visitors values for urban planning," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 76(C).
    3. Parnphumeesup, Piya & Kerr, Sandy A., 2011. "Stakeholder preferences towards the sustainable development of CDM projects: Lessons from biomass (rice husk) CDM project in Thailand," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 39(6), pages 3591-3601, June.
    4. Artur José Sitoe & Seunghoo Lim, 2024. "Understanding citizens' perception of channels for participating in administration based on their motivation in an authoritarian regime: The case of Gaza Province, Mozambique," Journal of International Development, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 36(1), pages 606-625, January.
    5. T. Gómez & M. Hernández & J. Molina & M. León & E. Aldana & R. Caballero, 2011. "A multiobjective model for forest planning with adjacency constraints," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 75-92, October.
    6. Jing Zhao & Hui Hu & Jinglei Wang, 2022. "Forest Carbon Reserve Calculation and Comprehensive Economic Value Evaluation: A Forest Management Model Based on Both Biomass Expansion Factor Method and Total Forest Value," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-15, November.
    7. Shahi, Chander & Kant, Shashi, 2007. "An evolutionary game-theoretic approach to the strategies of community members under Joint Forest Management regime," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 763-775, April.
    8. Wang, Sen & Wilson, Bill, 2007. "Pluralism in the economics of sustainable forest management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(7), pages 743-750, April.
    9. Loureiro, Maria L. & Dominguez Arcos, Fernando, 2012. "Applying Best–Worst Scaling in a stated preference analysis of forest management programs," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(4), pages 381-394.
    10. Rodríguez-Piñeros, Sandra & Martínez-Cortés, Oscar & Villarraga-Flórez, Liz & Ruíz-Díaz, Alejandra, 2018. "Timber market actors' values on forest legislation: A case study from Colombia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 1-10.
    11. Kangas, Annika & Laukkanen, Sanna & Kangas, Jyrki, 2006. "Social choice theory and its applications in sustainable forest management--a review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 77-92, November.
    12. Eyvindson, Kyle & Hujala, Teppo & Kangas, Annika & Kurttila, Mikko, 2012. "Selecting a forest plan among alternatives: Consistency of preferences within decision support frameworks," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(C), pages 114-122.
    13. McKinley, Duncan C. & Briggs, Russell D. & Bartuska, Ann M., 2012. "When peer-reviewed publications are not enough! Delivering science for natural resource management," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 1-11.
    14. Sell, Joachim & Koellner, Thomas & Weber, Olaf & Pedroni, Lucio & Scholz, Roland W., 2006. "Decision criteria of European and Latin American market actors for tropical forestry projects providing environmental services," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 58(1), pages 17-36, June.
    15. Bisera Andrić Gušavac & Selman Karagoz & Milena Popović & Dragan Pamućar & Muhammet Deveci, 2023. "Reconcilement of conflicting goals: a novel operations research-based methodology for environmental management," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 25(8), pages 7423-7460, August.
    16. Xiaoshu Li & G. Andrew Stainback, 2020. "On-Site Experience Effect on Stakeholders’ Preferences of Forest Management," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(19), pages 1-16, September.
    17. Gudbrand Lien & J. Hardaker & Marcel Asseldonk & James Richardson, 2011. "Risk programming analysis with imperfect information," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 190(1), pages 311-323, October.
    18. Antonio A R Ioris, 2011. "Values, Meanings, and Positionalities: The Controversial Valuation of Water in Rio de Janeiro," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 29(5), pages 872-888, October.
    19. Jiménez, Mariano & Bilbao-Terol, Amelia & Arenas-Parra, Mar, 2021. "Incorporating preferential weights as a benchmark into a Sequential Reference Point Method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 291(2), pages 575-585.
    20. Shirzadi, Somayeh & Sabouhi, Mahmood & Kenari, Reza Esfanjari, 2015. "Sustainable Management of Saravan Sylvan Park Using Stochastic Dynamic Programming," International Journal of Agricultural Management and Development (IJAMAD), Iranian Association of Agricultural Economics, vol. 5(3), September.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • Q10 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - General
    • Q15 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Land Ownership and Tenure; Land Reform; Land Use; Irrigation; Agriculture and Environment
    • Q19 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - Agriculture - - - Other
    • Q01 - Agricultural and Natural Resource Economics; Environmental and Ecological Economics - - General - - - Sustainable Development

    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:cfe:wpcefa:2012_22. 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: Angela Pacheco (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cfevopt.html .

    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.