Literature DB >> 14680896

Evaluating the management strategies of a forestland estate--the S-O-S approach.

Jyrki Kangas1, Mikko Kurttila, Miika Kajanus, Annika Kangas.   

Abstract

Connecting Multiple Criteria Decision Support (MCDS) methods with SWOT (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats) analysis yields analytical priorities for the factors included in SWOT analysis and makes them commensurable. In addition, decision alternatives can be evaluated with respect to each SWOT factor. In this way, SWOT analysis provides the basic frame within which to perform analyses of decision situations. MCDS methods, in turn, assist in carrying out SWOT more analytically and in elaborating the results of the analyses so that alternative strategic decisions can be prioritized also with respect to the entire SWOT. The A'WOT analysis is an example of such hybrid methods. It makes combined use of the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and SWOT. In this study, a hybrid method of the Stochastic Multicriteria Acceptability Analysis with Ordinal criteria (SMAA-O) and SWOT is developed as an elaboration of the basic ideas of A'WOT. The method is called S-O-S (SMAA-O in SWOT). SMAA-O enables the handling of ordinal preference information as well as mixed data consisting of both ordinal and cardinal information. Using SMAA-O is enough to just rank decision elements instead of giving them cardinal preference or priority ratios as required by the most commonly used MCDS methods. Using SMAA-O, in addition to analyzing what the recommended action is under certain priorities of the criteria, enables one to analyze what kind of preferences would support each action. The S-O-S approach is illustrated by a case study, where the shareholders of a forest holding owned by a private partnership prepared the SWOT analysis. Six alternative strategies for the management of their forest holding and of old cottage located on the holding were formed. After S-O-S analyses were carried out, one alternative was found to be the most recommendable. However, different importance orders of the SWOT groups would lead to different recommendations, since three of the six alternatives were efficient according to S-O-S analyses.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 14680896     DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2003.09.010

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Environ Manage        ISSN: 0301-4797            Impact factor:   6.789


  5 in total

1.  Perceptions of Government and Research Expert Groups and Their Implications for Watershed Management in Oklahoma, USA.

Authors:  Gehendra Kharel; Omkar Joshi; Ron Miller; Chris Zou
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2018-09-21       Impact factor: 3.266

2.  Market implementation of the MVA platform for pre-pandemic and pandemic influenza vaccines: A quantitative key opinion leader analysis.

Authors:  Bahar Ramezanpour; Esther S Pronker; Joost H C M Kreijtz; Albert D M E Osterhaus; E Claassen
Journal:  Vaccine       Date:  2015-06-03       Impact factor: 3.641

3.  Determining management strategies for the Sarikum Nature Protection Area.

Authors:  Sevgi Öztürk
Journal:  Environ Monit Assess       Date:  2015-02-13       Impact factor: 2.513

4.  Combining Stakeholder- and Social Network- Analysis to Improve Regional Nature Conservation: A Case Study from Osnabrück, Germany.

Authors:  Felix Przesdzink; Laura Mae Herzog; Florian Fiebelkorn
Journal:  Environ Manage       Date:  2021-11-30       Impact factor: 3.266

5.  Stakeholders' Perceptions of Agronomic Iodine Biofortification: A SWOT-AHP Analysis in Northern Uganda.

Authors:  Solomon Olum; Xavier Gellynck; Collins Okello; Dominic Webale; Walter Odongo; Duncan Ongeng; Hans De Steur
Journal:  Nutrients       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 5.717

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.