A multiple criteria decision analysis approach for assessing the quality of hardwood species used by Greek timber industries
Author:
Tsiaras Stefanos1, Chavenetidou Marina2, Koulelis Panagiotis P.1
Affiliation:
1. Hellenic Agricultural Organization - DIMITRA (ELGO - DIMITRA), Institute of Mediterranean Forest Ecosystems , Ilisia-Athens , Greece 2. School of Forestry and Natural Environment , Aristotle University of Thessaloniki , Thessaloniki , Greece
Abstract
Abstract
Timber industries make an essential contribution to economies worldwide, while the sustainable supply of timber generates revenue, supports employment, and contributes to economic activity. The strategic choice of wood species using specific criteria can have substantial economic outcomes for the timber industry in Greece. This study assessed the suitability of hardwood species most commonly used by Greek timber industries. The assessment was conducted with the use of a Multiple-Criteria Decision Analysis approach, taking into consideration specific criteria that affect the quality of timber. According to the findings, walnut was the optimal alternative that outranked the other examined species. Chestnut, oak, beech, ash, and hornbeam also achieved positive scores, and therefore, they are also acceptable alternatives as broadleaved species suitable for furniture manufacturing and sawn timber production. Greek timber industries can enhance their products’ value and market appeal by focusing on species that meet high-quality standards and consumer preferences.
Publisher
Walter de Gruyter GmbH
Reference62 articles.
1. Aicher, S., Christian, Z., Dill-langer, G., 2014. Hard-wood Glulams—emerging timber products of superior mechanical properties. In Proceedings of the World Conference on Timber Engineering (WCTE 2014). Quebec, Canada, 10-14 August 2014. Quebec City, Canada: FPInnovations. 10 p. DOI: 10.13140/2.1.5170.1120 2. Aicher, S., Ohnesorge, D., 2011. Shear strength of glued laminated timber made from European beech timber. European Journal of Wood and Wood Products, 69: 143–154. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00107-009-0399-9 3. Behzadian, M., Kazemzadeh, R.B., Albadvi, A., Aghdasi, M., 2010. PROMETHEE: a comprehensive literature review on methodologies and applications. European Journal of Operational Research, 200 (1): 198–215. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejor.2009.01.021 4. Brans, J.P., 1982. L’ingénierie de la décision; elaboration d’instruments d’aide à la décision. La méthode PROMETHEE [Decision engineering; development of decision support tools. The PROMETHEE method]. In Nadeau, R., Landry, M. (eds). L’aide à la décision: nature, instruments et perspectives d’avenir. Québec: Presses de l’Université Laval, p. 183–213. 5. Brans, J.P., De Smet, Y., 2016. PROMETHEE methods. In Greco, S., Ehrgott, M., Figueira, J. (eds). Multiple criteria decision analysis. International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, vol. 233. New York, NY: Springer, p. 187–220.
|
|