title: Evaluating the management strategies of a forestland estate--the S-O-S approach.
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.
authors.affiliation: UPM-Kymmene Forest, PO Box 32, Fin-37601 Valkeakoski, Finland. jyrki.kangas@upm-kymmene.com
authors.forename: Jyrki
authors.initials: J
authors.lastname: Kangas
authors.forename: Mikko
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kurttila
authors.forename: Miika
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Kajanus
authors.forename: Annika
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Kangas
mesh_terms: D003247:Conservation of Natural Resources; D003661:Decision Support Techniques; D005387:Finland; D016468:Forestry; D006801:Humans