The Application of SWOT-AHP Analysis in the Design and Construction of Forest Road Network Christodoulos Daoutis 1, Apostolos Kantartzis 1, Stergios Tampekis 2, Anastasia Stergiadou 3 and Garyfallos Arabatzis 1 1 Department of Forestry and Management of the Environment and Natural Resources, Democritus University of Thrace, 193 Pantazidou St., Orestiada, 68200, Greece 2 Department of Forestry and Natural Environment Management, Agricultural University of Athens, 3 Dimokratias St., Karpenisi, 36100, Greece 3 Department of Forestry and Natural Environment, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, 54124, Greece Abstract The construction of a forest road is a very expensive project and for this reason the choice of the appropriate location is of major importance for the designer. When designing, certain criteria must be taken into account, either individually or in combination with each other. In the present work, the SWOT analysis (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats) was applied together with AHP (Analytic Hierarchy Process) for the design and construction of a forest road in order to have a concentrated and hierarchical weights of SWOT criteria that play an important role. in the decisions in order to have the least possible financial burden in terms of construction and as little as possible environmental and social impact on the implementation of the project. The results from the application of AHP showed that strengths gather 57.7%, followed by weaknesses with 18.1% and opportunities with 15.9%. Last of the criteria as a whole are threats with 8.2%. Regarding the sub-criteria / factors that have the highest priority, the possibility of evacuating an area through the forest road network (such as natural disasters) gathers 35.5% for strengths, for weaknesses ecosystem disturbance has the highest percentage with 11.1 %, for the opportunities the increase in the yield potential of forest area (extraction of wood) with 8.1% and for the threats the possibility of destruction of infrastructure from natural disasters with 4.2%. The study area was the forest road network of the city of Xanthi (Eastern Macedonia and Thrace, Greece). Keywords 1 Design, construction, forest road, SWOT analysis, AHP 1. Introduction Forest roads are the main foundation of forest infrastructure, but on the other hand they are high- cost constructions and can cause significant environmental damage to forests [1]. According to Picchio et al. [2] The forest road network is important for several functions, such as connecting forest areas with roads. However, the design of forest roads is not an easy task as it should fulfill multiple conflicting objectives [3]. Construction and maintenance costs can increase in unsuitable areas, so great care is required when designing forest roads [4]. But it should be taken into account not only the total road costs but also the environmental impacts caused by the construction and use of the roads [5]. On the other hand, the forest road network plays an important role in the rational management of forests, for this reason the best possible planning is necessary [6]. Roads also contribute to forest fire protection and therefore play an important role in environmental protection [7]. and they can be used as escape Proceedings of HAICTA 2022, September 22–25, 2022, Athens, Greece EMAIL: chrintao@hotmail.gr (A. 1); apkantar@fmenr.duth.gr (A. 2); stampeki@aua.gr (A. 3); nanthy@for.auth.gr (A. 4); garamp@fmenr.duth.gr (A. 5) ORCID: 0000-0002-9563-959X (A. 3); 0000-0002-6132-2375 (A. 4); 0000-0003-3105-9083 (A. 5) ©️ 2022 Copyright for this paper by its authors. Use permitted under Creative Commons License Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). CEUR Workshop Proceedings (CEUR-WS.org) 209 exits in case it is not easy to extinguish the fire [8]. Adaptation to climate change requires a different way of thinking when designing forest roads [9], because the rate of erosion depends on the intensity of precipitation [10] and the extreme phenomena caused (fires). Thus regular removal of forest biomass along forest roads is therefore essential for fire prevention [11,12]. Forest roads are the main structures for the development of timber harvesting operations. For this reason it must be ensured that they will be open at all times [13]. Even the collected biomass waste can also be transported through the forest road network for methane production if disposed in anaerobic digestion facilities [14]. Forest roads serve multiple purposes, from recreation to facilitating the transportation of timber products. Many of these designed roads can be used in all seasons [15]. They are also used to connect areas, serve the residents [16] and help the economic development of the areas [17]. Roads create thinnings in dense forests and this is bee-friendly [18], for the development of beekeeping. They can also protect an area from poaching through patrols [19]. But according to Skidmore [20] roads also facilitate poaching because they connect even the most remote areas. Also the increase in road coverage can lead to fires when the population increases in areas that are less populated [21]. According to Demir [22] forests must be used according to forestry techniques so as not to alter the structure of the forest. Tampekis et al. [23] evaluated the intensity of human impact on the forest ecosystem as well as the absorption of the ecosystem from the impacts caused by the construction of forest roads. It must therefore serve the interests of both accessibility and sustainability. For this reason, the construction of a forest road network must be carefully studied because it can damage the environment [24]. 2. Study Area The study area was the city of Xanthi and in particular the forest road network of the area Geraka - Xanthi - Kimmeria (Eastern Macedonia and Thrace). The forest road network of the area is 67.76 km and includes all categories.This location was chosen because the forest road network connects some villages with each other and the inhabitants of these villages are primarily engaged in logging and other forest-related occupations. So a well-planned forest road network serves the needs of the residents. Figure 1: Study area of area Geraka - Xanthi - Kimmeria (Xanthi) [25]. 3. Methodology The association of AHP with SWOT contains detailed priorities for the factors included in the analysis and thus makes them comparable, with the aim of improving the quantitative database of strategic planning processes [26]. The answers were given by the authors who deal primarily with issues of forest road construction and forest economics. 210 The information derived from pairwise comparisons can be summarized in a table of weights, where the relative weight enters the table as an aij element and the inverse of the 1/aji preference ratio goes to the opposite side of the main diagonal. π‘Š1 β„π‘Š1 π‘Š1 β„π‘Š2 … π‘Š1 β„π‘Šπ‘› π‘Š2 β„π‘Š1 π‘Š2 β„π‘Š2 … π‘Š2 β„π‘Šπ‘› 𝛒 = (π‘Žπ‘–π‘— ) = ... (1) ... [ π‘Šπ‘› π‘Š1 π‘Šπ‘› π‘Š2 … π‘Šπ‘›β„π‘Šπ‘› ] ⁄ ⁄ When we multiply table A by the permutation of the vector of weights (w), we get the resulting vector nw (𝐴 βˆ’)π‘Š = 0, (2) For consistency Ξ»max = n otherwise Ξ»max> n. Table A should therefore be checked for consistency with the formula: (πœ†π‘šπ‘Žπ‘₯βˆ’π‘›) (3) 𝐢𝐼 = (π‘›βˆ’1) , The CI consistency index is determined by normalizing the following difference. The consistency index RI is the random index generated for a random order table n and CR is the consistency ratio [27]. The general rule is that CR must be CR≀0.1 for the table to be consistent 𝐢𝐼 𝐢𝑅 = , (4) 𝑅𝐼 4. Results Table 1 presents the Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats from ithe design and construction of Forest Road Network. Table 1 SWOT analysis Strengths Weaknesses S1:Ability to evacuate an area through the forest W1:Ecosystem disruption road network (such as natural disasters) W2:High cost of construction - maintenance S2: Protection of the forest from poaching W3:Corrosion of the deck by the high movement S3: Fire protection of water on the road S4: Connection of settlements Opportunities Threats Ο1:Increasing the efficiency of a forest area (wood T1:Possibility of destruction of infrastructure by extraction) natural disasters Ο2:Increase of recreation T2:Increased risk of fire due to increased Ο3:Development of various professions related to mobility of the population the forest and its functions (eg beekeeping) T3:Burden of the environment by the mobility of Ο4:Maximize the income of the inhabitants who the population live near the forests T4:Increase in poaching after easy access to the forest environment 211 Table 2 shows the degree of importance after the pairwise comparison of (Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats). Positives occupy the largest percentage (57.7%), immediately after Weaknesses occupy 18.1%, followed by opportunities with 15.9% and threats have the smallest percentage (8.2%). Table 2 Comparisons of SWOT group SWOT group Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats Importance Degrees Strengths 1.00 6.80 4.03 4.04 0.577 Weaknesses 0.15 1.00 2.09 2.58 0.181 Opportunities 0.25 0.48 1.00 3.20 0.159 Threats 0.25 0.39 0.31 1.00 0.082 CR = 0.09 Table 3 shows the degree of significance after the pairwise comparison of Strengths. The Ability to evacuate an area through the forest road network (such as natural disasters) occupies a percentage (61.6%), followed by Fire protection with 18.4% and Protection of the forest from poaching with 10.8%. Last is Connection of settlements (9.2%). Table 3 Comparisons of Strengths group Importance Strengths S1 S2 S3 S4 Degrees S1:Ability to evacuate an area through the forest road network (such as natural 1.00 6.42 4.82 5.60 0.616 disasters) S2:Protection of the forest from poaching 0.16 1.00 1.16 0.77 0.108 S3:Fire protection 0.21 0.87 1.00 4.40 0.184 S4:Connection of settlements 0.18 1.30 0.23 1.00 0.092 CR = 0.07 Table 4 shows the degree of significance after the pairwise comparison of Weaknesses. The criterion that is considered more important is Ecosystem disruption with 61.4% followed by High cost of construction – maintenance 27.9% and the least important is Corrosion of the deck by the high movement of water on the road with 10.7%. Table 4 Comparisons of Weaknesses group Importance Weaknesses W1 W2 W3 Degrees W1:Ecosystem disruption 1.00 3.10 4.40 0.614 W2:High cost of construction – maintenance 0.32 1.00 3.60 0.279 W3:Corrosion of the deck by the high movement of 0.23 0.28 1.00 0.107 water on the road CR = 0.08 212 Table 5 shows the degree of significance after pairwise comparison of Opportunities. First in the ranking is Increasing the productivity of a forest area (extraction of wood) with 48.5%, second is Increasing recreation with 29.9%, third is the Development of various professions related to the forest and its functions (e.g. beekeeping) with 14.1% and finally Maximizing the income of residents living near forests with 7.6%. Table 5 Comparisons of Opportunities group Importance Opportunities Ο1 Ο2 Ο3 Ο4 Degrees Ο1:Increasing the efficiency of a forest area 1.00 2.37 3.85 4.27 0.485 (wood extraction) Ο2:Increase of recreation 0.42 1.00 2.87 4.64 0.299 Ο3:Development of various professions related to the forest and its functions (eg 0.26 0.35 1.00 2.71 0.141 beekeeping) Ο4:Maximize the income of the inhabitants who 0.23 0.22 0.37 1.00 0.076 live near the forests CR = 0.09 Table 6 shows the degree of significance after pairwise comparison of Threats. The respondents ranked the Possibility of destruction of infrastructure by natural disasters first with a percentage of 51.2%, second place came the Increased risk of fire due to increased mobility of the population with a percentage of 27.0%. The third and fourth places were occupied by Burden of the environment by the mobility of the population (13.9%) and Increase in poaching after easy access to the forest environment (7.9%) respectively. Table 6 Comparisons of Threats group Importance Threats T1 T2 T3 T4 Degrees T1:Possibility of destruction of infrastructure 1.00 3.20 4.00 4.10 0.512 by natural disasters T2:Increased risk of fire due to increased 0.31 1.00 3.00 4.00 0.270 mobility of the population T3:Burden of the environment by the mobility 0.25 0.33 1.00 2.67 0.139 of the population T4:Increase in poaching after easy access to 0.24 0.25 0.38 1.00 0.079 the forest environment CR = 0.09 Table 7 presents the overall priority scores of the SWOT factors as well as the priority of each factor. 213 Table 7 Total priority scores of the SWOT factors Priory Priority factors Overall SWOT group of SWOT factors within the priority group Group of the factor S1:Ability to evacuate an area through the forest road network (such as 0.616 0.355 natural disasters) S2:Protection of the forest from 0.108 0.062 poaching Strengths 0.577 S3:Fire protection 0.184 0.106 S4:Connection of settlements 0.092 0.053 W1:Ecosystem disruption 0.614 0.111 W2:High cost of construction – Weaknesses 0.181 0.279 0.050 maintenance W3:Corrosion of the deck by the high 0.107 0.019 movement of water on the road O1:Increasing the efficiency of a forest 0.512 0.081 area (wood extraction) O2:Increase of leisure 0.270 0.043 Opportunities 0.159 O3:Development of various professions related to the forest and its functions 0.139 0.022 (eg beekeeping) O4:Maximize the income of the 0.079 0.013 inhabitants who live near the forests T1:Possibility of destruction of 0.512 0.042 infrastructure by natural disasters T2:Increased risk of fire due to 0.270 0.022 increased mobility of the population Threats 0.082 T3:Burden of the environment by the 0.139 0.011 mobility of the population T4:Increase in poaching after easy 0.079 0.006 access to the forest environment 5. Conclusions In the present work, SWOT-AHP was applied for the construction of a forest road network. The results from the implementation of AHP showed that the strengths as a whole are superior by 57.7% compared to the other criteria. Following are the weaknesses with 18.1% and the opportunities with 214 15.9%. Last of the criteria as a whole are the threats (8.2%), that may exist during the construction of forest roads. Regarding the sub-criteria / factors that have the highest priority, the possibility of evacuating an area through the forest road network (such as natural disasters) gathers 35.5% for the strong points, for the weak points the ecosystem disturbance has the largest percentage with 11.1% , for the opportunities the increase of the efficiency possibility of a forest area (wood extraction) with 8.1% and for the threats the possibility of destruction of infrastructures from natural disasters with 4.2%. In conclusion, we would say that the construction of forest roads has positive benefits both for the protection of human life in case of evacuation of an area and for access to the forest in case of fire. It can also offer opportunities to increase the income of the inhabitants by engaging in professions that have direct contact with the forest. The disadvantages as well as the threats from the construction are small scale based on the answers. For this reason SWOT-AHP can be a tool that can be used to make rational decisions taking into account all the factors that affect it. Thus, it can be used to solve issues related to the functions of the forest in general. 6. References [1] E. Γ‡alişkan, Environmental impacts of forest road construction on mountainous terrain. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Sciences & Engineering 10 (23), 2013, pp. 1-8. [2] R. Picchio, F. Tavankar, R. Venanzi, A. Lo Monaco, M. Nkkooy, Study of forest road effect on tree community and stand structure in three Italian and 1 Iranian temperate forests. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 39, 2018, pp. 57–70. [3] A. Enache, V.D. Ciobanu, M. KΓΌhmaier, K. Stampfer, An Integrative Decision Support Tool for Assessing Forest Road Options in a Mountainous Region in Romania. Croatian Journal of Forest Engineering, 34, 2013, pp.43–60. [4] K.M. Samani, S.A. Hosseiny, M. Lotfalian, A. Najafi, Planning road network in mountain forests using GIS and Analytic Hierarchical Process (AHP). Caspian Journal Environmental Sciences 8 (2), 2010, pp. 51–162. [5] E. Γ‡alişkan E, Environmental impacts of forest road construction on mountainous terrain. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Sciences & Engineering 10 (23), 2013, pp. 1-8. [6] E. Hayati, B. Majnounian, E. Abdi, Qualitative evaluation and optimization of forest road network to minimize total costs and environmental impacts. iForest 5, 2012, pp. 121–125. [7] A. Parsakhoo, M. Lotfalian, S.A. Hosseini, Forest roads planning and construction in Iranian forestry. Journal of Civil Engineering and Construction Technology, 1(1), 2010, pp. 14-18. [8] A. Laschi, C. Foderi, F. Fabiano, F. Neri, M. Cambi, B. Mariotti, E. Marchi, Forest Road Planning, Construction and Maintenance to Improve Forest Fire Fighting: a Review. Croatian journal of Forest engineering, 40 (1), 2019, pp. 207-219. [9] A. Kantartzis, G. Arabatzis, O. Christopoulou, A. Sfougaris, S. Sakellariou, C. Malesios, E. Tsiaras, F. Samara, S. Tampekis, Forest roads planning and management in terms of Social- Ecological Systems (SES) framework. 2nd International Conference on Environmental Design. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 899 (2021) 012052. doi:10.1088/1755- 1315/899/1/012052 [10] L.H. MacDonald, D.B. Coe, Road sediment production and delivery: processes and management, in: Proceedings of the First World Landslide Forum, International Programme on Landslides and International Strategy for Disaster Reduction. United Nations University Tokyo, Japan, 2010, pp. 381–384. [11] V. Diamantis, A. Eftaxias, C. Daoutis, C. Michailidis, A. Kantartzis, Valorisation of forest biomass as novel substrate for biogas production and the prevention of wild fires. 29th European Biomass Conference and Exhibition Proceeding (EUBCE), 2021, pp. 596–599. [12] A. Eftaxias, E.A. Passa, C. Michailidis, C. Daoutis, A. Kantartzis, V. Diamantis, Residual Forest Biomass in Pinus Stands: Accumulation and Biogas Production Potential. Energies 15 (14), 2022, 5233. doi.org/10.3390/en15145233. 215 [13] A.O. Akay, M. Akgul, M. Demir, H.H. Acar, Analysis of factors associated with the amount of forest road reconstruction activity in Turkey: Autoregressive distributed lag modelling approach. Forest Ecology and Management 458, 2020, 117800. [14] A. Kantartzis, C. Daoutis, A. Eftaxias, G. Arabatzis, V. Diamantis, Biomass residues adjacent forest roads in two different forest species (Fagus sylvativa and Pinus brutia): quantities and evaluation of their biogas production potential. 2nd International Conference on Environmental Design. IOP Conf. Series: Earth and Environmental Science 899 (2021) 012030. doi:10.1088/1755-1315/899/1/012030. [15] A. De Witt, K. Boston, B. Leshchinsky, Predicting Aggregate Degradation in Forest Roads in Northwest Oregon. Forests 11, 729, 2020, doi:10.3390/f11070729. [16] R. Picchio, F. Tavankar, R. Venanzi, A. Lo Monaco, M. Nikooy, Study of Forest Road Effect on Tree Community and Stand Structure in Three Italian and Iranian Temperate Forests. Croatian journal of Forest engineering 39 (1), 2018, pp. 57-70. [17] D.J. Kaczan, Can roads contribute to forest transitions? World Development 129, 104898, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.worlddev.2020.104898. [18] J.L. Hanula, M.D. Ulyshen, S. Horn, Conserving Pollinators in North American Forests: A Review. Natural Areas Journal 36 (4), 2016, pp. 427-439. [19] A. Blom, R. van Zalinge, I.M.A. HeitkΓΆnig, H.H.T. Prins, Factors influencing the distribution of large mammals within a protected central African forest. Oryx 39 (4), 2005, pp. 381-388. [20] A. Skidmore, Using crime script analysis to elucidate the details of Amur tiger poaching in the Russian Far East. Crime Science 10 (16), 2021, pp. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40163-021- 00150-z. [21] T. Zumbrunnen, G.B. Pezzatti, P. MenΓ©ndez, H. Bugmann, M. BΓΌrgi, M. Conedera, Weather and human impacts on forest fires: 100 years of fire history in two climatic regions of Switzerland. Forest Ecology and Management 261 (12), 2011, pp. 2188-2199. [22] M. Demir, Impacts, management and functional planning criterion of forest road network system in Turkey Transportation Research Part A 41, 2007, pp. 56–68. [23] S. Tampekis, S. Sakellariou, F. Samara, A. Sfougaris, D. Jaeger, O. Christopoulou, Mapping the optimal forest road network based on the multicriteria evaluation technique: the case study of Mediterranean Island of Thassos in Greece. Environmental monitoring and assessment, 187(11), 2015, pp. 1-17. [24] S. Gumus, H.H. Acar, D. Toksoy, Functional forest road network planning by consideration of environmental impact assessment for wood harvesting. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment, 142, 2008, pp. 109–116. [25] Hellenic Forest Services, department of Xanthi. [26] M. Kurttila, J. Pesonen, M. Kangas, M. Kajanus, Utilizing the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in SWOT analysis hybrid method and its application to a forest-certification case , Forest Policy and Economics 1, 2000, pp. 41-52. [27] T.L. Saaty, The analytic hierarchy process: a 1993 overview. Central European Journal of Operation Research and Economics 2 (2), 1993, pp. 119–137. 216