Research Summary


Project: Spatial Representation and Modeling in Natural Resource Management
Support: National Science Foundation (10/1/01 - 9/30/04)
Award Number: 0114362
Principal Investigator: A.T. Murray

Summary

A goal of natural resource management is to balance multiple uses of forest lands. One aspect has been production oriented, and is concerned with where and when timber extraction takes place. This is commonly a component of the harvest scheduling process.  Another aspect of natural resource management involves the protection of species and habitat through a process known as nature reserve design. Both timber harvesting and resource conservation are integral components of public and private forest usage and planning, but do not necessarily occur in a coordinated fashion. One area of study will be a comparative evaluation of harvest scheduling optimization models for limiting spatial activity. The dominant feature of current approaches is the need to limit or restrict the local extent of harvest activity. One approach assumes that spatial units are of sufficient size to require explicit stipulations regarding what may take place in neighboring units. The alternative approach recognizes that spatial units may in fact be relatively small in relation to maximum disturbance restrictions. The differences between these two approaches are associated with how spatial impacts are limited mathematically. This project will investigate differences between these two approaches, particularly with respect to spatial scale and unit definition. Exact and heuristic solution development for harvest scheduling will necessarily be a major area of focus in this project. An important theoretical aim is to evaluate whether spatial inconsistencies exist between the two approaches. The final area of study in this project involves the integration of nature reserve design and harvesting considerations. Although harvesting approaches explicitly limit the impact of local disturbances of forest harvesting, they do not attempt to address reserve site selection. Establishing reserves is also an important component of natural resource management. Spatial optimization models are integral in nature reserve design. Integrated modeling approaches combining issues of production (harvest scheduling) and conservation (nature reserve design) using multi-objective optimization methods enables conflicts to be resolved in a coordinated fashion. Such integration utilizing geographic information system (GIS) techniques and functionality is expected to contribute significantly to planning and policy evaluation directed at sustainable forest management practices.

Student Collaborators

Xiaolan Wu - Ph.D. 2005, Department of Geography, OSU

Bryan Chastain - MA 2005, Department of Geography, OSU
Tim Matisziw - Ph.D. 2005, Department of Geography, OSU

Marcos Goycoolea - Ph.D. student, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Tech
Juan Pablo Vielma - Ph.D. student, School of Industrial and Systems Engineering, Georgia Tech

Collaborators

Francisco Barahona (IBM Watson Research Center)
Raphael Epstein (Universidad de Chile)
David Ryan (University of Auckland)
Andres Weintraub (Universidad de Chile)

Teaching

A graduate seminar was taught in Autumn, 2002 associated with this research (Geography 840.02 - “Seminar in Location Analysis: Natural Resource Management”) with seven graduate students enrolled from Geography and Natural Resources.

Produced Publications

  1. "Scale and unit specification influences in harvest scheduling with maximum area restrictions", A.T. Murray and A. Weintraub, Forest Science, 48, 2002.
  2. “SDSS in the management of forest resources,” A.T. Murray. In The Encyclopedia of Life Support Systems, 2002 (Oxford, UK: EOLSS Publishers).
  3. "Incorporating average and maximum area restrictions in harvest scheduling models", A.T. Murray, M. Goycoolea and A. Weintraub, Canadian Journal of Forest Research, 34, 456-464, 2004.
  4. "Harvest scheduling subject to maximum area restrictions: exploring exact approaches", M. Goycoolea, A.T. Murray, F. Barahona, R. Epstein and A. Weintraub, Operations Research, 53, 490-500, 2005.
  5. "Assessing landscape contiguity in reserve design", A.T. Murray and X. Wu, In Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, edited by M. Bevers and T.M. Barrett 85-88, 2005 (Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-656. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station).
  6. "Improved solution techniques for multi-period area-based forest harvest scheduling problems", J.P. Vielma, A.T. Murray, D. Ryan and A. Weintraub, In Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, edited by M. Bevers and T.M. Barrett, 285-290, 2005 (Gen. Tech. Rep. PNW-GTR-656. Portland, OR: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station).
  7. "Spatial environmental concerns," In Handbook on Operations Research in Natural Resources, edited by A. Weintraub, T. Bjorndal, R. Epstein and C. Romero, 2006 (Kluwer).
  8. "A review of combinatorial problems induced by spatial forest harvesting planning," A. Weintraub and A.T. Murray, Discrete Applied Mathematics, 154, 867-879, 2006..
  9. "Improving computational capabilities for addressing volume constraints in forest harvest scheduling problems,"J.P. Vielma, A.T. Murray, D.M. Ryan and A. Weintraub, European Journal of Operational Research 176, 1246-1264, 2007.
  10. "Promoting species persistence through spatial association optimization in nature reserve design," T.C. Matisziw and A.T. Murray., Journal of Geographical Systems 8, 289-305, 2007.
  11. "A new approach to quantifying spatial contiguity using graph theory and spatial interaction," X. Wu and A.T. Murray, submitted for publication.

Presentations

  1. “Solving the adjacency problem constructing the harvesting units”, A. Weintraub, A.T. Murray, M. Goycoolea, R. Epstein and F. Barahona, INFORMS, Miami, Florida, USA, November 4-7, 2001.
  2. “Geographical considerations in forest management planning”, A.T. Murray.  Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University, February 6, 2002.
  3. “An exact algorithm for the area restriction model”, M. Goycoolea, A.T. Murray, J. Vielma, F. Barahona, R. Epstein and A. Weintraub. Systems Analysis Forestry Symposium Chile 2002, Punta de Tralca, Chile, March 4-7, 2002.
  4. “Exploring alternative interpretations of maximum area restrictions in harvest scheduling,” A.T. Murray. Departamento de Ingenieria Industrial, Universidad de Chile, June 5, 2002.
  5. “Modeling average and maximum area restrictions in harvest scheduling”, M. Goycoolea, A.T. Murray and A. Weintraub. INFORMS, San Jose, California, USA, November 17-20, 2002.
  6. “Solving a difficult exact formulation of a spatial forestry problem”, A. Weintraub, A.T. Murray, D. Ryan and J.P. Vielma. Mathematical Programming in Rio, A Conference in Honour of Nelson Maculan, Buzios, Brasil November 9-12, 2003.
  7. “Quantification of spatial contiguity”, X. Wu and A.T. Murray. Centennial Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, March 14-19, 2004.
  8. “Enhancing species survivability in nature reserve design”, T.C. Matisziw and A.T. Murray. Centennial Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, March 14-19, 2004.
  9. “Exact formulation for spatial harvesting problems”, A. Weintraub, A.T. Murray, D. Ryan and J. Vielma. CORS/INFORMS Joint International Meeting, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May 16-19, 2004.
  10. “Improved solution techniques for multi-period area-based harvest scheduling problems”, J.P. Vielma, A.T. Murray, D. Ryan and A. Weintraub. Symposium for Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, Stevenson, Washington, USA, October 7-9, 2003.
  11. “Assessing landscape contiguity in reserve design”, A.T. Murray and  X. Wu. Symposium for Systems Analysis in Forest Resources, Stevenson, Washington, USA, October 7-9, 2003.
  12. “Quantification of spatial contiguity”, X. Wu and A.T. Murray. Centennial Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, March 14-19, 2004.
  13. “Enhancing species survivability in nature reserve design”, T.C. Matisziw and A.T. Murray. Centennial Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA, March 14-19, 2004.
  14. “Exact formulation for spatial harvesting problems”, A. Weintraub, D. Ryan, J. Vielma and A.T. Murray. CORS/INFORMS Joint International Meeting, Banff, Alberta, Canada, May 16-19, 2004.
  15. "Spatial contiguity in land use planning," X. Wu and A.T. Murray. GIScience 2004, College Park, Maryland, USA, October 20-23, 2004.
  16. “Optimizing spatial contiguity in land use modeling”, X. Wu and A.T. Murray. 51th North American Meeting of the Regional Science Association International, Seattle, Washington, USA, November 11-13, 2004.
  17. "Spatial structure in harvest scheduling optimization," B. Chastain and A.T. Murray, 101st Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers, Denver, Colorado, USA, April 5-9, 2005.
  18. "Comparison of methodologies for limiting opening sizes in forest harvest scheduling," J.P. Vielma, M. Goycoolea, A. Murray and A. Weintraub, INFORMS Annual Meeting, San Francisco, California, USA, November 13-16, 2005.

Related Publications

  1. "Heuristic solution approaches to operational forest planning problems", A.T. Murray and R.L. Church, OR Spektrum 17(2/3), 1995, 193-203 (special issue).
  2. "Measuring the efficacy of adjacency constraint structure in forest planning", A.T. Murray and R.L. Church, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 25, 1995, 1416-1424.
  3. "Analyzing cliques for imposing adjacency restrictions in forest models", A.T. Murray and R.L. Church, Forest Science 42, 1996, 166-175.
  4. "Constructing and selecting adjacency constraints", A.T. Murray and R.L. Church, INFOR 34, 1996, 232-248 (special issue).
  5. "Facets for node packing", A.T. Murray and R.L. Church, European Journal of Operational Research 101, 1997, 598-608.
  6. "Locational issues in forest management", R.L. Church, A.T. Murray and A. Weintraub, Location Science 6, 1998, 137-153 (special issue).
  7. "Operational forest planning and Steiner tree extensions ", A.T. Murray, R.L. Church and A. Weintraub, Geographical Systems 5, 1998, 221-237.
  8. "Ecosystem management or infreasible guidelines? Implications of adjacency restrictions for wildlife habitat and timber production", A.T. Murray, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 28, 1998, 1093-1094.
  9. "Route planning for harvest site access", A.T. Murray, Canadian Journal of Forest Research 28, 1998, 1084-1087.
  10. "Spatial restrictions in harvest scheduling", A.T. Murray, Forest Science 45, 1999, 45-52.
  11. "Support system development for forest ecosystem management", R.L. Church, A.T. Murray, M.A. Figueroa and K.H. Barber, European Journal of Operational Research 121, 2000, 247-258 (special issue).
  12. "Spatial modeling in forest management and natural resource planning", A.T. Murray and S. Snyder, Forest Science 46, 2000, 153-156.
  13. "Forest planning at the tactical level", R.L. Church, A.T. Murray and K.H. Barber, Annals of Operations Research, 95, 2000, 3-18 (special issue).
  14. "Forest management models and combinatorial algorithms: analysis of state of the art", A. Weintraub, R.L. Church, A.T. Murray and M. Guignard, Annals of Operations Research, 96, 2000, 271-285 (special issue).
Last updated : 1/11/07