Author(s): Marques, Marlene Maria Guilherme
Date: 2022
Persistent ID: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.5/27519
Origin: Repositório da UTL
Project/scholarship: info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/FCT/OE/PD%2FBD%2F128257%2F2016/PT;
Subject(s): ecosystem services; forest management models; participatory planning; multicriteria decision analysis; joint management areas
Doutoramento em Engenharia Florestal e dos Recursos Naturais / Instituto Superior de Agronomia. Universidade de Lisboa
Sustainable forest management planning is challenged by the expectation for natural resources to provide a broad range of ecosystem services (ES). This can become more complex in joint management areas because the decision can involve several to many actors with different interests and objectives. The goal of this research is to facilitate forest management planning that best reflects the diversity of actors’ interests and that is better suited to face the challenges of the 21st century by (1) identifying the relevant actors and factors that impact forest management decisions (actor analysis); (2) assessing actors’ preferences for forest management models (FMMs) and ES (two-stage questionnaires); (3) developing a combined multicriteria decision analysis and group decision-making approach to quantify the criteria weights and rank seven FMMs (cognitive map, multicriteria questionnaire, and Delphi survey); (4) applying a Group Multicriteria Spatial Decision Support System approach to negotiate consensual solutions for seven ES, according to the objectives of four interest groups, and spatially prioritize the allocation of ES to forest management units. We report results from an application in Vale do Sousa, in northwestern Portugal. There was a consensus among the actors for a forest resilient to wildfires and a multifunctional forest that offers a diversity of ES but can be profitable. In two-stage questionnaires, actors ranked the FMM of pure eucalypt higher. However, in the multicriteria questionnaire, the FMM with the highest performance was the pedunculate oak and eucalypt was the least preferable. We found significant differences in priority scores between civil society and the other three groups, highlighting civil society and market agents as the most discordant groups. These findings contribute to a better understanding of forest management decisions. They can support joint management areas managers and other decision-makers in enhancing landscape-level, collaborative, and sustainable forest management planning, thus facilitating its implementation.
