Constructing forest plans interactively based on owner-driven evaluation of the holding- and stand-level alternatives

References

• Borges JG, Hoganson HM, Falcão AO. (2002). Heuristics in multi-objective forest management. In: Pukkala T. Multi-objective forest planning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Manag Forest Ecosyst. 5:119–152.
   Google Scholar
• Chertov A, Komarov G, Andrienko N, Andrienko P, Gatalsky P. 2002. Integrating forest simulation models and spatial–temporal interactive visualization for decision making at landscape level. Ecol Model. 148:47–65. 10.1016/S0304-3800(01)00437-9
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz-Balteiro L, González-Pachón J, Romero C. 2013. Goal programming in forest management: customizing models for the decision-maker's preferences. Scan J Forest Res. 28:166–173. 10.1080/02827581.2012.712154
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyvindson K. 2012. Integration of preference elicitation and the development of alternative forest plans: focusing on the requirements of the decision maker. Dissert Forest. 147. Available from: http://www.metla.fi/dissertationes/df147.htm.
   Google Scholar
• Favada IM, Karppinen H, Kuuluvainen J, Mikkola J, Stavness C. 2009. Effects of timber prices, ownership objectives, and owner characteristics on timber supply. Forest Sci. 55:512–523.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harrison TP, Rosenthal RE. 1988. An implicit/explicit approach to multi-objective optimization with application to forest management planning. Decision Sci. 19:190–210. 10.1111/j.1540-5915.1988.tb00261.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hiltunen V, Kangas J, Pykäläinen J. 2008. Voting methods in strategic forest planning — experiences from Metsähallitus. Forest Policy Econ. 10:117–127. 10.1016/j.forpol.2007.06.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hokajärvi R. 2012. Metsäsuunnitteluprosessin kehittäminen – yksityismetsien suunnittelutoiminta ja sen historiallinen kehitys muutoksen suuntaajana [Developing the forest planning process – changes directed by the planning practices and their historical development in non-industrial private forests]. Dissertationes Forestales. 145; p. 50. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Hujala T, Höglund H, Mehtätalo L, Pykäläinen J. 2012. Trialogical learning — a concept for enhancing interactive forest planning. In: Meyer SR. Conference Proceedings, IUFRO 3.08.00 Small-Scale Forestry Conference 2012: Science for Solutions. Amherst (MA): Family Forest Research Center; p. 58–63.
   Google Scholar
• Hynynen J, Ojansuu R, Hökkä H, Siipilehto J, Salminen H, Haapala P. 2002. Models for predicting stand development in MELA System. Research Papers 835. Vantaa: Finnish Forest Research Institute, p. 116.
   Google Scholar
• Hyvän metsänhoidon suositukset [Forest management practice recommendations]. 2006. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapio. Metsäkustannus Oy, Helsinki; p. 100. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Hänninen H, Karppinen H, Leppänen J. 2010. Suomalainen metsänomistaja 2010 [Finnish forest owner 2010]. Available from: http://www.metla.fi/julkaisut/workingpapers/2011/mwp208.htm. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas A, Kangas J, Kurttila M. 2008. Decision support for forest management. Manag Forest Ecosyst. 16:222.
   Google Scholar
• Kangas J, Pukkala T, Pykäläinen J. 1996. Vuorovaikutteinen heuristinen optimointi yksityismetsien suunnittelussa [Interactive heuristic optimization in holding-specific forest management planning]. Folia Forestalia. 1996:231–244. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Karppinen H. 1992. Metsänomistuksen muuttuvat tavoitteet [Changing goals of private forest owners]. Työtehoseuran metsätiedote 508. Finnish with English summary.
   Google Scholar
• Karppinen H. 1998. Values and objectives of non-industrial private forest owners in Finland. Silva Fenn. 32:43–59.
   Google Scholar
• Keeney RL. 1982. Decision analysis. An overview. Oper Res. 30:803–838. 10.1287/opre.30.5.803
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keskimölö A, Heikkinen E, Keränen K. 2007. Pohjois-Suomen metsänhoitosuositukset 2007 [Forest management recommendations for Northern Finland]. Metsäkeskus Lappi, Metsäkeskus Pohjois-Pohjanmaa, Metsäkeskus Kainuu; p. 58. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Kurttila M, Korhonen K, Hänninen H, Hujala T. 2010. Yksityismetsien metsäsuunnittelu 2010 — nykytilanne ja kehittämistarpeita [Holding-specific forest management planning 2010–present situation and needs of development]. Vantaa: Metlan työraportteja/Working Papers of the Finnish Forest Research Institute 153; p. 43. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Kurttila M, Pykäläinen J, Hujala T. 2013. Optimoinnin käyttö yksityismetsien tilatason metsäsuunnittelussa [Use of optimization in holding-specific forest management planning]. Metsätieteen aikakauskirja. 1:61–70. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Miettinen K. 1999. Nonlinear multiobjective optimization. Boston: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Nordström E-M, Romero C, Eriksson LO, Öhman K. 2009. Aggregation of preferences in participatory forest planning with multiple criteria: an application to the urban forest in Lycksele, Sweden. Can J Forest Res. 39:1979–1992. 10.1139/X09-107
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Næsset, E. 2007. Airborne laser scanning as a method in operational forest inventory: status of accuracy assessments accomplished in Scandinavia. Scand J Forest Res. 22:433–442. 10.1080/02827580701672147
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Öhman K. 2002. Spatial optimization in forest planning. In: Pukkala T. Multi-objective forest planning. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers; p. 153–172.
   Google Scholar
• Paavola S, Hakkarainen K. 2005. The knowledge creation metaphor – an emergent epistemological approach to learning. Sci Educ. 14:535–557. 10.1007/s11191-004-5157-0
   Google Scholar
• Pasanen K, Kurttila M, Pykäläinen J, Kangas J, Leskinen P. 2005. Mesta – non-industrial private forest owners’ decision-support environment for the evaluation of alternative forest plans over the internet. Int J Inf Tech Decis. 4:601–620. 10.1142/S0219622005001726
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pesonen M. 1995. Non-industrial private forest landowners’ choices of timber management strategies and potential allowable cut: case of Pohjois-Savo. Acta Forestalia Fennica. 247:31.
   Google Scholar
• Pukkala T, Kellomäki S, Mustonen E. 1988. Prediction of the amenity of a tree stand. Scand J Forest Res. 3:533–544. 10.1080/02827588809382538
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pykäläinen J. 2000. Defining forest owners' forest-management goals by means of a thematic interview in interactive forest planning. Silva Fennica. 34:47–59.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pykäläinen J, Kurttila M. 2009. Interactive method for supporting forest owners in biodiversity protection decisions. Small-Scale Forest. 8:337–348. 10.1007/s11842-009-9087-1
   Google Scholar
• Redsven V, Hirvelä H, Härkönen K, Salminen O, Siitonen M. 2011. MELA2009 reference manual. 2nd ed. Vantaa: The Finnish Forest Research Institute; p. 664.
   Google Scholar
• Ruotsalainen M. 2007. Hyvän metsänhoidon suositukset turvemaille [Forest management recommendations for peat lands]. Metsätalouden kehittämiskeskus Tapio julkaisusarja 26. Metsäkustannus Oy, Helsinki; p. 51. Finnish.
   Google Scholar
• Siitonen M, Härkönen K, Hirvelä H, Jämsä J, Kilpeläinen H, Salminen O, Teuri M. 1996. MELA handbook – 1996 edition. Vantaa: The Finnish Forest Research Institute, Metsäntutkimuslaitoksen tiedonantoja 622; p. 452.
   Google Scholar
• Spence R. 2007. Information visualization – design for interaction. 2nd ed. Harlow: Pearson Education; p. 304.
   Google Scholar
• Steuer RE. 1986. Multiple criteria optimization. Theory, computation and application. New York: Wiley; p. 546.
   Google Scholar
• Tecle A, Duckstein L, Korhonen P. 1994. Interactive multiobjective programming for forest resources management. Appl Math Comput. 63:75–93.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar