Reframing the Model I, II and III Harvest Scheduling Formulations in the Context of Managing Forests for Ecosystem Services DOI Open Access
Silvana Ribeiro Nobre, Marc E. McDill, Luiz Carlos Estraviz Rodriguez

et al.

Published: July 16, 2024

Since the 1960s, forest planners have used linear programming models to develop management plans for large, forested areas. Hundreds of academic papers presented such models, incorporating multiple objectives, a growing diversity interventions, and uncertainty, among other things. Three basic ways formulate these been used: Model I, III, III. We define based on sequence unit states represented by variables. In variables represent from beginning planning horizon end. II, one intervention next. Finally, in single arc unit’s decision tree, including only an ending state. each type model case study with three increasingly complex scenarios additional ecosystem services. Our results indicate that, despite requiring more constraints, III requires least time formulate, largely because it has dense parameter matrix. II shortest solution times, close behind. I both longest formulation times.

Language: Английский

Reframing the Model I, II and III Harvest Scheduling Formulations in the Context of Managing Forests for Ecosystem Services DOI Open Access
Silvana Ribeiro Nobre, Marc E. McDill, Luiz Carlos Estraviz Rodriguez

et al.

Published: July 16, 2024

Since the 1960s, forest planners have used linear programming models to develop management plans for large, forested areas. Hundreds of academic papers presented such models, incorporating multiple objectives, a growing diversity interventions, and uncertainty, among other things. Three basic ways formulate these been used: Model I, III, III. We define based on sequence unit states represented by variables. In variables represent from beginning planning horizon end. II, one intervention next. Finally, in single arc unit’s decision tree, including only an ending state. each type model case study with three increasingly complex scenarios additional ecosystem services. Our results indicate that, despite requiring more constraints, III requires least time formulate, largely because it has dense parameter matrix. II shortest solution times, close behind. I both longest formulation times.

Language: Английский

Citations

1