Environmental and conservation decisions are often complex, which results in complexity also in policy assessments. Conservation decisions have implications for different stakeholders and typically draw on multidisciplinary knowledge bases, incorporating natural, physical and social sciences, politics and ethics. Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) is a potentially important tool for supporting conservation policy decisions. This article reports a spatially referenced MCDA of policy instrument scenarios for conserving forest biodiversity in Southwestern Finland. The effects of the realistic policy instruments designed in dialogue with stakeholders included voluntary permanent conservation, enforced spatially concentrated permanent conservation, voluntary permanent conservation with active nature management, and voluntary temporary conservation. These instruments were compared by combining forest-owner survey, MCDA and ex ante impact evaluation. The main objective was to find the forest biodiversity conservation instrument that would produce the highest total benefit. The effects of the different instruments were evaluated with ecological, economic, social, and institutional criteria after a 20-year time period. The results showed minor differences between the instruments, with voluntary permanent and voluntary temporary conservation producing the largest total benefit. Despite the small differences, the analysis was robust in showing that voluntary instruments were more favourable than enforced permanent conservation.

中文翻译：

---

上下文敏感的政策工具：保护芬兰西南部森林栖息地的多标准决策分析

环境和保护决策通常很复杂，这导致政策评估也很复杂。保护决策对不同的利益相关者有影响，通常利用多学科知识库，结合自然、物理和社会科学、政治和伦理。多标准决策分析 (MCDA) 是支持保护政策决策的潜在重要工具。本文报告了芬兰西南部森林生物多样性保护政策工具情景的空间参考 MCDA。与利益相关者对话设计的现实政策工具的效果包括自愿永久保护、强制空间集中永久保护、主动自然管理的自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护。通过结合森林所有者调查、MCDA 和事前影响评估，对这些工具进行了比较。主要目标是找到能够产生最高总收益的森林生物多样性保护工具。在 20 年的时间段后，根据生态、经济、社会和制度标准评估了不同工具的效果。结果显示这些工具之间的差异很小，自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护产生的总收益最大。尽管存在微小差异，但分析表明自愿性工具比强制永久保护更有利。主要目标是找到能够产生最高总收益的森林生物多样性保护工具。在 20 年的时间段后，根据生态、经济、社会和制度标准评估了不同工具的效果。结果显示这些工具之间的差异很小，自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护产生的总收益最大。尽管存在微小差异，但分析表明自愿性工具比强制永久保护更有利。主要目标是找到能够产生最高总收益的森林生物多样性保护工具。在 20 年的时间段后，根据生态、经济、社会和制度标准评估了不同工具的效果。结果显示这些工具之间的差异很小，自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护产生的总收益最大。尽管存在微小差异，但分析表明自愿性工具比强制永久保护更有利。自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护产生最大的总收益。尽管存在微小差异，但分析表明自愿性工具比强制永久保护更有利。自愿永久保护和自愿临时保护产生最大的总收益。尽管差异很小，但分析表明自愿性工具比强制的永久性保护更有利。