Comparing Model I and Model II formulations of spatially explicit harvest scheduling models with maximum area restrictions

Marc E. McDill, Sándor F. Tóth, Rachel St John, Janis Braze, Stephanie A. Rebain

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

11 Scopus citations

Abstract

This article investigates whether Johnson and Scheurman’s (For. Sci. Monogr. 18, Society of American Foresters, Bethesda, MD 1977) Model II formulation, which can dramatically reduce the size and difficulty of linear programming harvest scheduling models, offers similar potential for efficiency gains in solving spatially explicit harvest scheduling models with area-based adjacency constraints. A total of 150 hypothetical problems and 10 real problems were formulated using Models I and II. The hypothetical problems were distributed (30 each) in five categories: regulated forest problems with four, six, and eight planning periods and overmature forest problems with four and six periods. The length of the planning horizon was a key factor determining the relative performance of Model I and Model II formulations in spatially explicit forest management planning problems. Results from the hypothetical problems suggest that Model I formulations outperform Model II formulations for four period problems. However, Model II formulations perform significantly better than Model I formulations for problems with planning horizons of six and eight planning periods. Real forest results exhibit similar trends.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)28-37
Number of pages10
JournalForest Science
Volume62
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 8 2016

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Forestry
  • Ecology
  • Ecological Modeling

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Comparing Model I and Model II formulations of spatially explicit harvest scheduling models with maximum area restrictions'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this