European commitments towards sustainable forest management (SFM) are well established at the political level. However, progress in implementing the principles of SFM at the operational scale lags behind. As an option to foster this process, the application of indicators within a multi-criteria analysis (MCA) framework is proposed.
In this contribution, Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART), the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the Analytic Network Process (ANP), PROMETHEE I/II and ELECTRE III are applied to assess the performances of four management units representing different forestry regimes within a region. A recently developed set of indicators at forest management unit level is used in the analysis.
The implementation of SFM requires a holistic view on multiple goals and values, the awareness of uncertain and inhomogeneous knowledge, the guidance of stakeholder involvement and a spatially explicit long-term perspective. Against this background, the potentials and limits of each MCA method to assess SFM are compared with regard to (i) handling preferences and trade-offs between indicators, (ii) sensitivity in covering complex information on the human-ecosystem interaction, (iii) dealing with thresholds and uncertainty of value information, (iv) participatory planning and group decision making processes, and (v) communicative features.
In this contribution, Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique (SMART), the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP), the Analytic Network Process (ANP), PROMETHEE I/II and ELECTRE III are applied to assess the performances of four management units representing different forestry regimes within a region. A recently developed set of indicators at forest management unit level is used in the analysis.
The implementation of SFM requires a holistic view on multiple goals and values, the awareness of uncertain and inhomogeneous knowledge, the guidance of stakeholder involvement and a spatially explicit long-term perspective. Against this background, the potentials and limits of each MCA method to assess SFM are compared with regard to (i) handling preferences and trade-offs between indicators, (ii) sensitivity in covering complex information on the human-ecosystem interaction, (iii) dealing with thresholds and uncertainty of value information, (iv) participatory planning and group decision making processes, and (v) communicative features.
Posted in: 
