Utilizing a fuzzy inference system (FIS) and modified analytical hierarchical analysis for forest road network planning in afforested lands

• Autorzy: Bugday E. , Ozel H.B.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Afforestation activity needs serious feasibility in as much as it is a work of establishing a new facility. Moreover, the process of selecting the land to be afforested; determining site conditions; selecting suitable tree species, provenance, and clones; the planting or sowing techniques; and planning of the environmental transport network are all costly. Determining suitable areas for environmental road network installation, which has an important place in afforestation areas, is discussed in this study. In this context, characteristics of an afforestated area have been evaluated by virtue of the fuzzy inference system (FIS) and modified analytical hierarchical analysis (M-AHP) methods on a sample area established as an afforestation area. The main objective of this study is planning in a way that is sensitive to nature and strives for ecological balance on environmental forest road networks for forested and afforested areas by utilizing multiple decision support methods with a view to realizing maintenance on afforestation areas in short- and long-term processes. A total of eight factors were determined in the study. The best twelve models, obtained as a result of analyses carried out with these factors, are presented. The success of the models was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis and the best model was obtained by M-AHP, which was Model 4M-AHP with 71.2% area under curve (AUC) value. We observed that the model obtained through the M-AHP method is more successful in on-site road network planning during the phase of creating the afforestation projects.

• Wydawca: -
• Czasopismo: Polish Journal of Environmental Studies
• Rocznik: 2019
• Tom: 28
• Numer: 3
• Opis fizyczny: p.1579-1589,fig.,ref.

Twórcy

autor

Bugday E.

• Department of Forest Engineering, Faculty of Forestry, Cankırı Karatekin University, Cankırı, Turkey

autor

Ozel H.B.

• Department of Forest Engineering, Faculty of Forestry, Bartın University, Agdaci Campus, Bartın, Turkey

Bibliografia

• 1. FAO. Global forest resources assessment 2015 How are the world’s forests changing? Second Edition. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Publisher, Italy, 54-, 2016.
• 2. BARBIER E.B. Natural barriers to natural disasters: replanting mangroves after the tsunami. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, 4 (3), 124, 2006.
• 3. BENSEL T. Fuelwood, deforestation, and land degradation: 10 years of evidence from Cebu Province, The Philippines. Land Degradation & Development, 19 (6), 587, 2008.
• 4. ÇALIŞKAN S., BOYDAK M. Afforestation of arid and semiarid ecosystems in Turkey. Turkish Journal of Agriculture and Forestry, 41 (5), 2017.
• 5. RYU S.R., CHOI H.T., LIM J.H., LEE I.K., AHN Y.S. Post-fire restoration plan for sustainable forest management in South Korea. Forests, 8 (6), 188, 2017.
• 6. FAOSTAT. http://www.fao.org/faostat/en/#data/GF (access 25/01/2018)
• 7. KIRSCHBAUM M.U.F., WHITEHEAD D., DEAN S.M., BEETS P.N., SHEPHERD J.D., AUSSEIL A.G. Implications of albedo changes following afforestation on the benefits of forests as carbon sinks. Biogeosciences, 8 (12), 3687, 2011.
• 8. KIM G.S., LIM C.H., KIM S.J., LEE J., SON Y., LEE W.K. Effect of national-scale afforestation on forest water supply and soil loss in South Korea, 1971-2010. Sustainability, 9 (6), 1017, 2, 2017.
• 9. LU C.X., ZHAO T.Y., SHI X.L., CHAO S. Ecological restoration by afforestation may increase groundwater depth and create potentially large ecological and water opportunity costs in arid and semiarid China. Journal of Cleaner Production. 176, 1 March 2018, 1213, 2018.
• 10. YOSEF G., WALKO R., AVISAR R., TATARINOV F., ROTENBERG E., YAKIR D. Large-scale semiarid afforestation can enhance precipitation and carbon sequestration potential. Scientific Reports, 8 (1), 996, 2018.
• 11. DAŞDEMIR İ., ŞAHIN A. Economical appraising of plantation alternatives in Bartın region, Journal of Bartın Forestry Faculty, 4 (4), 38, 2002.
• 12. ŹRÓBEK-RÓŻAŃSKA A., NOWAK A., NOWAK M., ŹRÓBEK S. Financial dilemmas associated with the afforestation of low-productivity farmland in Poland. Forests, 5 (11), 2846, 2014.
• 13. OZMIŞ M., TOLUNAY A. The Determination of economic value and the trend of society payment of the erosion control services, University of Süleyman Demirel, Journal of Natural Applied Science Institute, 21 (1), 99, 2017 [In Turkish].
• 14. MUYS B., LUST N., GRANVAL P.H. Effects of Grassland Afforestation with Different Tree Species on Earthworm Communities, Litter Decomposition and Nutrient Status. Soil biology and biochemistry, 24 (12), 1459, 1992.
• 15. TUNÇTANER K., ÖZEL H.B., ERTEKIN M. Investigation on Adaptation Abilities of Native and Exotic Tree Species Used in The Afforestation Areas in Bartın Region, Journal of Bartın Forestry Faculty, 9 (11), 11, 2007 [In Turkish].
• 16. VAN ELEGEM B., EMBO T., MUYS B., LUST N. A Methodology to select the best locations for new urban forests using multicriteria analysis. Forestry, 75 (1), 13, 2002.
• 17. GIMONA A., VAN DER HORST D. mapping hotspots of multiple landscape functions: a case study on farmland afforestation in scotland. Landscape Ecology, 22 (8), 1255, 2007.
• 18. ÖZEL H.B., KARAYILMAZLAR S., DEMIRCI A. Location Selection for Afforestation Activities Using Mediterranean Pine Selection (Pinus brutia Ten. and Pinus pinea L.) in Bartın Watershed by Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) Method, II. National Mediterranean Forest and Environment Symposium “The Future of Mediterranean Forests: Sustainable Society and Environment”, Süleyman Demirel University Publisher, Turkey, , 1, 22, 2014 [In Turkish].
• 19. HUNTER I.R., HOBLEY M., SMALE P. Afforestation of degraded land - pyrrhic victory over economic, social and ecological reality? Ecological Engineering, 10 (1), 97, 1998.
• 20. IMAL B., BIRBEN U., ÖNER N., ÖZDEN S. Socio-Economic Benefits of Afforestation Project with in The Social Risk Mitigation Project (SRMP), The Research Association of Rural Environment and Forestry Publisher, Turkey 32, 2006 [In Turkish].
• 21. PILLI R., GRASSI G., MORIS J.V., KURZ W.A. Assessing the carbon sink of afforestation with the carbon budget model at the country level: an example for Italy. iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 8 (4), 1, 2014.
• 22. AHLSWEDE B.J., THOMAS R.Q. Community earth system model simulations reveal the relative importance of afforestation and forest management to surface temperature in Eastern North America. Forests, 8 (12), 2, 2017.
• 23. AKAY A.E. Minimizing total costs of forest roads with computer-aided design model. Sadhana, 31 (5), 621, 2006.
• 24. DEMIR M. Impacts, management and functional planning criterion of forest road network system in Turkey. Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, 41 (1), 56, 2007.
• 25. HAYATI E., MAJNOUNIAN B., ABDI E. Qualitative evaluation and optimization of forest road network to minimize total costs and environmental impacts. iForest-Biogeosciences and Forestry, 5 (3), 121, 2012.
• 26. HAVIMO M., MONKONEN P., LOPATIN E., DAHLIN B. Optimising forest road planning to maximise the mobilisation of wood biomass resources in northwest Russia. Biofuels, 8 (4), 501, 2017.
• 27. GUMUS S., ARICAK B., ENEZ K., ACAR H.H. Analysis of tree damage caused by rockfall at forest road construction works. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering. 30 (2), 151, 2009.
• 28. OZTURK T., INAN M., AKGUL M. Environmental damages of forest road construction by bulldozer on steep terrain. African Journal of Biotechnology, 8 (18), 4547, 2009.
• 29. OZTURK T., INAN M., AKAY A.E. Analysis of tree damage caused by excavated materials at forest road construction in karst region. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering. 31 (1), 57, 2010.
• 30. ACAR H.H. Environmental sensitive road planning and transportation techniques in forest engineering. Journal of the Faculty of Forestry of Istanbul University, 66 (2), 710, 2016.
• 31. LOTFALIAN L., NASIRI M. The distribution and frequency of damage to roadside trees in low-volume road construction. Journal of Forestry Research. 29 (1), 221, 2018.
• 32. ÇALIŞKAN E. Planning of forest road network and analysis in mountainous area. Life Science Journal, 10 (2), 2456, 2013.
• 33. HAYATI E., MAJNOUNIAN B., ABDI E., SESSIONS J., MAKHDOUM M. An expert-based approach to forest road network planning by combining delphi and spatial multi-criteria evaluation. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 185 (2), 1767, 2013a.
• 34. GULCI S., AKAY A.E. Assessment of ecological passages along road networks within the Mediterranean forest using GIS-based multi criteria evaluation approach. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 187 (12), Article No: 779, 2, 2015.
• 35. LASCHI A., NERI F., BRACHETTI MONTORSELLI N., MARCHI E. A methodological approach exploiting modern techniques for forest road network planning. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 37 (2), 319, 2016.
• 36. STEFANOVIĆ B., STOJNIĆ D., DANILOVIĆ M. Multi-criteria forest road network planning in fire-prone environment: a case study in Serbia. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59 (5), 911, 2016.
• 37. CALISKAN E. Planning of environmentally sound forest road route using GIS & S-MCDM. Šumarski list, 141 (11-12), 583, 2017.
• 38. ACAR H.H., DURSUN E., GULCI S., GUMUS S. Assessment of road network planning by using GIS-based multi-criteria evaluation for conversion of coppice forest to high forest. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 26 (3), 2380, 2017.
• 39. BUGDAY E. Application of artificial neural network system based on anfis using GIS for predicting forest road network suitability mapping. Fresenius Environmental Bulletin, 27 (3), 1656, 2018.
• 40. ANONYMOUS Doğantepe erozyon kontrolü uygulama projesi. Çankırı Ağaçlandırma ve Toprak Muhafaza Şefliği, General Directorate of Combating Desertification and Erosion, Turkey, 1, 2015 [In Turkish].
• 41. MOORE I.D., GRAYSON R.B., LADSON A.R. Digital terrain modelling: a review of hydrological, geomorphological, and biological applications. Hydrological Processes, 5 (1), 3, 1991.
• 42. WILSON J.P., GALLANT J.C. Secondary topographic attributes. terrain analysis: principles and applications, John Wiley& Sons Publisher, United State of America, 87, 2000.
• 43. CETIN M. Using GIS analysis to assess urban green space in terms of accessibility: case study in Kutahya. International Journal of Sustainable Development & World Ecology, 22 (5), 420, 2015.
• 44. CETIN M., ADIGUZEL F., KAYA O., SAHAP, A. Mapping of bioclimatic comfort for potential planning using GIS in Aydin. Environment, Development and Sustainability, 20 (1), 361, 2018.
• 45. ALEKSEEV A.S., NIKIFOROV A.A. Effects of topography on the structure and productivity of forest landscapes using 3D modeling in terms of the Lisinsky educational and experimental forest enterprise. Contemporary problems of ecology, 7 (7), 815, 2014.
• 46. POURGHASEMI H.R., BEHESHTIRAD M., PRADHAN B. A comparative assessment of prediction capabilities of Modified Analytical Hierarchy Process (M-AHP) and Mamdani Fuzzy Logic Models using Netcad-GIS for forest fire susceptibility mapping. Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 7 (2), 861, 2016.
• 47. SEZER E.A., NEFESLIOGLU H.A., OSNA T. An expert-based landslide susceptibility mapping (LSM) module developed for Netcad Architect Software. Computers & Geosciences, 98, 26, 2017.
• 48. GERDSRI N., KOCAOGLU D.F. Applying the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) to build a strategic framework for technology road mapping. Mathematical and Computer Modelling, 46 (7-8), 1071, 2007.
• 49. AHMED N.G., ASMAEL N.M. A GIS-assisted optimal Baghdad metro route selection based on multi criteria decision making. Journal of Engineering and Development, 19 (06), 44, 2015.
• 50. BARIĆ D., PILKO H., STRUJIĆ J. An analytic hierarchy process model to evaluate road section design. Transport, 31 (3), 312, 2016.
• 51. KUŠAR M., ŠELIH J. Determination of refurbishment priorities for passes on road network level. Tehnički Vjesnik, 24 (4), 1129, 2017.
• 52. KUMAR Y., PANCHAL S., ASHISH A., SINGH B. P. Feasibility study of railway line in hilly region using GIS. International Journal of Online Engineering (iJOE), 13 (08), 183, 2017.
• 53. NAGHDI R., BABAPOUR R. Planning and evaluating of forest roads network with respect to environmental aspects via GIS application (Case Study: Shafaroud Forest, Northern Iran). In Environmental and Computer Science-2009 (IEEE), IEEE Publisher, Iran, 1, 424, 2009.
• 54. GHAJAR I., NAJAFI A., ALI TORABI S., KHAMEHCHIYAN M., BOSTON K. An adaptive network-based fuzzy inference system for rock share estimation in forest road construction. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering: Journal for Theory and Application of Forestry Engineering, 33 (2), 313, 2012.
• 55. NORIZAH K., MOHD HASMADI I. Developing priorities and ranking for suitable forest road allocation using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) in Peninsular Malaysia. Sains Malaysiana, 41 (10), 1177, 2012.
• 56. HAYATI E., ABDI E., MAJNOUNIAN B., MAKHDOM M. Application of sensitivity analysis in forest road networks planning and assessment. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology. 15 (1), 781, 2013b.
• 57. BABAPOUR R., NAGHDI R., SALEHI A., GHAJAR I. A decision support system for allocation of mountain forest roads based on ground stability. Arabian Journal for Science and Engineering, 39 (1), 199, 2014.
• 58. GUMUS S. An evaluation of stakeholder perception differences in forest road assessment factors using the Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP). Forests, 8 (5), 165, pp. 2-9, 2017.
• 59. NEFESLIOGLU H.A., SEZER E.A., GOKCEOGLU C., AYAS Z. A Modified Analytical Hierarchy Process (M-AHP) approach for decision support systems in natural hazard assessments. Computers & Geosciences, 59, 1, 2013.
• 60. GOKCEOGLU C., NEFESLIOGLU H.A., TANYILDIZ N. A decision support system suggestion for the optimum railway route selection. In Engineering Geology for Society and Territory-Volume 5, Springer Press, Netherland, 331, 2015.
• 61. ZADEH L.A. Information and Control. Fuzzy Sets, Information and Control, 8 (3), 338, 1965.
• 62. AKGUN A., SEZER E.A., NEFESLIOGLU H.A., GOKCEOGLU C., PRADHAN B. An easy to use MATLAB Program (MamLand) for the assessment of landslide susceptibility using a Mamdani Fuzzy Algorithm. Computer Geoscience 38 (1), 23, 2012.
• 63. POURGHASEMI H.R., PRADHAN B., GOKCEOGLU C. Application of Fuzzy Logic and Analytical Hierarchy Process (AHP) to landslide susceptibility mapping at Haraz Watershed, Iran. Natural Hazards, 63 (2), 965, 2012.
• 64. BALEZENTIENE L., STREIMIKIENE D., BALEZENTIS T. Fuzzy decision support methodology for sustainable energy crop selection. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 17, 83, 2013.
• 65. SEIBERT J., STENDAHL J., SØRENSEN R. Topographical influences on soil properties in Boreal Forests. Geoderma, 141 (1-2), 139, 2007.
• 66. KOLKA R.K., SMIDT M.F. Effects of forest road amelioration techniques on soil bulk density, surface runoff, sediment transport, soil moisture and seedling growth. Forest Ecology and Management, 202 (1-3), 313, 2004.
• 67. JAAFARI A., NAJAFI A., POURGHASEMI H.R., REZAEIAN J., SATTARIAN A. GIS-based frequency ratio and index of entropy models for landslide susceptibility assessment in the Caspian Forest, Northern Iran. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology, 11 (4), 909, 2014.
• 68. PRADHAN B. Use of GIS-based fuzzy logic relations and its cross application to produce landslide susceptibility maps in three test areas in Malaysia. Environmental Earth Sciences, 63 (2), 329, 2011.
• 69. POURGHASEMI H.R., ROSSI M. Landslide susceptibility modeling in a landslide prone area in Mazandarn Province, North of Iran: A comparison between GLM, GAM, MARS, and M-AHP Methods. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 130 (1-2), 609, 2017.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.15244/pjoes/89611