Pages with the most revisions

From COST Action FP0804: FORSYS
Jump to: navigation, search

Showing below up to 250 results starting with #51.

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)

  1. Case Studies‏‎ (23 revisions)
  2. NED‏‎ (22 revisions)
  3. ATestCase‏‎ (22 revisions)
  4. Case-Lessons by WG themes matrix‏‎ (21 revisions)
  5. Wg3 workplan‏‎ (21 revisions)
  6. Esc‏‎ (21 revisions - redirect page)
  7. 1. Defining the problem‏‎ (21 revisions)
  8. Lessons Group Workplan 2013‏‎ (21 revisions)
  9. ForestGALES‏‎ (21 revisions)
  10. DSS description Handbook‏‎ (21 revisions)
  11. EMIS‏‎ (20 revisions)
  12. SADMVMC‏‎ (20 revisions)
  13. AVVIRK-2000‏‎ (19 revisions)
  14. Question: Which DSSs have spatial context‏‎ (18 revisions)
  15. 2011-06 Thessaloniki Case Study Notes by WG‏‎ (18 revisions)
  16. Participatory planning case template‏‎ (18 revisions)
  17. Wg1 workplan‏‎ (18 revisions)
  18. Has description‏‎ (17 revisions)
  19. FMPP‏‎ (17 revisions)
  20. Woodstock‏‎ (16 revisions)
  21. Vista‏‎ (15 revisions)
  22. Wiki TaskForce‏‎ (15 revisions)
  23. SADfLOR/SAGfLOR‏‎ (14 revisions)
  24. Import Lessons from test wiki‏‎ (14 revisions)
  25. Classification of Knowledge Management tools‏‎ (14 revisions)
  26. Mesta‏‎ (14 revisions)
  27. Need of flexibilization of analytical tools - no overdesigned tool that provides too much features for the use‏‎ (14 revisions)
  28. FFIREDESSYS‏‎ (14 revisions)
  29. Wg2 workplan‏‎ (14 revisions)
  30. Agflor‏‎ (13 revisions)
  31. Conifer Timber Quality‏‎ (13 revisions)
  32. EnerTree‏‎ (13 revisions)
  33. MELA‏‎ (13 revisions)
  34. Case Studies Analysis‏‎ (13 revisions)
  35. Case Studies List‏‎ (12 revisions)
  36. Herbicideadvisor‏‎ (12 revisions)
  37. ToSIA‏‎ (12 revisions)
  38. SADfLOR/INfLOR‏‎ (11 revisions)
  39. Question: Question: Which DSSs use Stochastic programming‏‎ (11 revisions)
  40. It would have been better to involve some end users at earlier stages of the system development‏‎ (11 revisions)
  41. Monsu‏‎ (11 revisions)
  42. Which kinds of DSS focus on landscape quality‏‎ (11 revisions)
  43. COST Action FP0804: FORSYS:Community Portal‏‎ (11 revisions)
  44. Lower-case property values (import error)‏‎ (11 revisions)
  45. OSMOSE‏‎ (11 revisions)
  46. Emis‏‎ (11 revisions - redirect page)
  47. Guideline‏‎ (10 revisions)
  48. MONTE‏‎ (10 revisions)
  49. Lessons from Country Studies‏‎ (10 revisions)
  50. Test‏‎ (10 revisions)
  51. AFFOREST-sDSS‏‎ (10 revisions)
  52. Question: What FMDSS information is available related to climate change‏‎ (10 revisions)
  53. Guidelines/Problem Type 1‏‎ (10 revisions)
  54. The Forest Time Machine‏‎ (10 revisions)
  55. RPF‏‎ (10 revisions)
  56. Update detailed documentation of how to create / edit new DSSs‏‎ (10 revisions)
  57. HMSS‏‎ (10 revisions)
  58. Question: Which DSSs are developed/used to address that specific Forsys problem?‏‎ (9 revisions)
  59. The definition of standardized and specific criteria for selecting and zoning forest compartment‏‎ (9 revisions)
  60. Question: What kind of decision support techniques are implemented in DSS‏‎ (9 revisions)
  61. Hugin‏‎ (9 revisions)
  62. 2011-11 Leuven Case Study Agenda‏‎ (9 revisions)
  63. Test template‏‎ (9 revisions)
  64. EFISCEN‏‎ (9 revisions)
  65. Properties - Has domain - Has DSS development stage‏‎ (9 revisions)
  66. Neighbourhood interrelations should be included in the generator‏‎ (9 revisions)
  67. To compare the current and the past quantitative-qualitative parameters of the forest, great effort‏‎ (9 revisions)
  68. Question: Which DSSs were developed by large team of people‏‎ (8 revisions)
  69. Success criteria‏‎ (8 revisions)
  70. The choice to develop the system in an Excel environment was based on the status of computer‏‎ (8 revisions)
  71. The use of structured output (maps, tables and charts) makes the methodology and the results more‏‎ (8 revisions)
  72. Заглавная страница‏‎ (8 revisions)
  73. FVS‏‎ (8 revisions)
  74. Users preferred enhanced functionality rather than useability‏‎ (8 revisions)
  75. Import queries and other pages from the testwiki‏‎ (8 revisions)
  76. Contry Report Category‏‎ (8 revisions)
  77. Using Actor Network Theory in the design stage can help in understanding the dynamism of the network‏‎ (8 revisions)
  78. GB Forestry DSS‏‎ (8 revisions)
  79. Adapting the software to make it possible to easily include also the output of other mechanistic‏‎ (8 revisions)
  80. Question: Which DSSs support multiple objectives‏‎ (8 revisions)
  81. The adoption of the collaborative learning method made possible to gradually select the conceptual‏‎ (8 revisions)
  82. Case Study Literature Methods‏‎ (8 revisions)
  83. Students studying forest management planning procedures and processes were very useful product testers‏‎ (8 revisions)
  84. Provide a simple version of the DSS, which new users can try out and learn quickly‏‎ (7 revisions)
  85. STSM Call 2012-12‏‎ (7 revisions)
  86. Provide missing help-documentation service‏‎ (7 revisions)
  87. Visualization of the preliminary actor network made the people explicity include the DSS in a planning process‏‎ (7 revisions)
  88. 2011-06 Thessaloniki Case Study Notes by Research Phase‏‎ (7 revisions)
  89. The DSS models built must match the knowledge of the local forest managers, so the ability for local‏‎ (7 revisions)
  90. Sim4Tree‏‎ (7 revisions)
  91. DSS allowed to explain better some technical concepts to non-professional stakeholders‏‎ (7 revisions)
  92. The fact that ProgettoBosco is conceived according to the criteria and indicators of sustainable‏‎ (7 revisions)
  93. Participation in forest planning in Sardinia‏‎ (7 revisions)
  94. The kinds of DSS traditionally used to calculate timber harvest levels are now being used to model‏‎ (7 revisions)
  95. Actor Network Theory provides a suitable lens for exploring both technical and human aspects of DSS institutionalization in the forestry domain‏‎ (7 revisions)
  96. Participatory Planning in a Pulpwood Supply Chain Planning in a Portuguese integrated Pulp and Paper Company‏‎ (7 revisions)
  97. Need for new models for the later use of a tool‏‎ (7 revisions)
  98. DSS can help in varying the treatment according to more than one forest function‏‎ (7 revisions)
  99. TerEval‏‎ (7 revisions)
  100. Need of a moderator function‏‎ (7 revisions)
  101. Regular ongoing engagement helped maintain interest of users‏‎ (7 revisions)
  102. TEAMS‏‎ (7 revisions)
  103. Geo-SIMA-HWIND‏‎ (7 revisions)
  104. SIPAFIT can act sometimes as a referee to settle arguments among experts, users and stakeholders‏‎ (7 revisions)
  105. Case-Lessons by ID with WG themes‏‎ (7 revisions)
  106. Wiki editing‏‎ (7 revisions)
  107. Community of Practice‏‎ (7 revisions)
  108. HaRPPS‏‎ (6 revisions)
  109. Finland-Strategic planning at the national forest administration‏‎ (6 revisions)
  110. ETÇAP‏‎ (6 revisions)
  111. A a test lesson‏‎ (6 revisions)
  112. Criterium DecisionPlus‏‎ (6 revisions)
  113. FORSYS Problem dimensions - necessary or not for Lesson‏‎ (6 revisions)
  114. Import data Methods and Dimensions (WG2)‏‎ (6 revisions)
  115. The development of large and enduring systems requires a long term approach‏‎ (6 revisions)
  116. A financial analysis is an important component in the discussion about the preferences of different‏‎ (6 revisions)
  117. Italy-A comprehensive system for forest management planning in Trentino Province‏‎ (6 revisions)
  118. Methods and Models‏‎ (6 revisions)
  119. T(ree)‏‎ (6 revisions)
  120. Some pages do not display‏‎ (6 revisions)
  121. Question: DSS for evaluating options‏‎ (6 revisions)
  122. An optimisation module comparing alternative scenarios based on multi-criteria analysis should be‏‎ (6 revisions)
  123. Enlarged decision space‏‎ (6 revisions)
  124. The scope of the modeling project can change significantly during the project‏‎ (6 revisions)
  125. Embedding a DSS in a GIS software allows obtaining information at different spatial scales using the‏‎ (6 revisions)
  126. From a management perspective, to avoid the complication of testing something new, the models used‏‎ (6 revisions)
  127. HARVEST‏‎ (6 revisions)
  128. Wiki User's glossary‏‎ (6 revisions)
  129. The activation of an iterative process through periodical meetings permitted to all the stakeholders‏‎ (6 revisions)
  130. Combo box vs. multiple values (Has other models)‏‎ (6 revisions)
  131. Heureka/RegWise‏‎ (6 revisions)
  132. 3. Evaluating options‏‎ (6 revisions)
  133. New structure of the wiki start page‏‎ (6 revisions)
  134. The tracing of the current actor network interactions made the group realize that they need a different kind of stakeholders from what they previously thought‏‎ (6 revisions)
  135. SimForTree‏‎ (6 revisions)
  136. DSS for managing forest fire casualties‏‎ (6 revisions)
  137. Information about the properties‏‎ (6 revisions)
  138. Case Studies Lessons List‏‎ (6 revisions)
  139. The analysis of the actor network interactions allowed to identify the criticalities to be solved in order to develop the collaborative process‏‎ (6 revisions)
  140. Herbicide Advisor‏‎ (6 revisions)
  141. It is necessary to know which data will be use as variables in the models before designing the DSS‏‎ (5 revisions)
  142. DSS helped document and apply decision criteria consistently, and therefore produced a more‏‎ (5 revisions)
  143. To meet the needs of customer - the Forest Service - and to obtain satisfying results the‏‎ (5 revisions)
  144. Use of adequate DSS development methodology‏‎ (5 revisions)
  145. Quality flag: implementation still hanging‏‎ (5 revisions)
  146. TestTable‏‎ (5 revisions)
  147. TAURON‏‎ (5 revisions)
  148. The DSS gave the forest manager the opportunity to experiment how their emphasis towards certain‏‎ (5 revisions)
  149. SiWaWa‏‎ (5 revisions)
  150. Lack of proper documentation and support services (manual, website, etc) can severely limit the‏‎ (5 revisions)
  151. Stakeholders contribution in ranking forest functions‏‎ (5 revisions)
  152. Lessons from Survey‏‎ (5 revisions)
  153. Question: DSS Commercial Product‏‎ (5 revisions)
  154. T‏‎ (5 revisions)
  155. Some of the queries in FAQ are not yet implemented‏‎ (5 revisions)
  156. An iterative process of presenting results to subject matter experts enabled them to better‏‎ (5 revisions)
  157. ClimChAlp‏‎ (5 revisions)
  158. FORESTAR‏‎ (5 revisions)
  159. Integration of decision support tools?‏‎ (5 revisions)
  160. DSS architecture and design Workplan 2013‏‎ (5 revisions)
  161. Test query‏‎ (5 revisions)
  162. SØK‏‎ (5 revisions)
  163. ForestGales‏‎ (5 revisions)
  164. Knowledge management process - definitions of alternatives are not clear enough fro a non-expert user‏‎ (5 revisions)
  165. SifPlan‏‎ (5 revisions)
  166. The tracing of the actor network supported the identification of the key actors influencing the collaborative DSS implementation and institutionalization‏‎ (5 revisions)
  167. VDDT-Path‏‎ (5 revisions)
  168. Help page navigation link changed to Category:Help‏‎ (5 revisions)
  169. Interpretative case studies can help reduce the gap between research and practice‏‎ (5 revisions)
  170. Afforestion and deforestation options should be included in the management options‏‎ (5 revisions)
  171. Russia.61‏‎ (4 revisions)
  172. Stakeholder involvement in DSS design‏‎ (4 revisions)
  173. SGIS.Decision support techniques‏‎ (4 revisions)
  174. Chile.65‏‎ (4 revisions)
  175. Switzerland.73‏‎ (4 revisions)
  176. T2‏‎ (4 revisions)
  177. Austria.83‏‎ (4 revisions)
  178. United States.21‏‎ (4 revisions)
  179. Portugal.31‏‎ (4 revisions)
  180. Slovenia.48‏‎ (4 revisions)
  181. Forest managers have to analyze how their forest management interventions effect the landscape‏‎ (4 revisions)
  182. Brazil.37‏‎ (4 revisions)
  183. Portugal.95‏‎ (4 revisions)
  184. Slovenia.101‏‎ (4 revisions)
  185. Ireland.56‏‎ (4 revisions)
  186. Canada.75‏‎ (4 revisions)
  187. Spain.51‏‎ (4 revisions)
  188. The analysis team used internal prototyping, which helped train the staff and identify possible‏‎ (4 revisions)
  189. Sweden-The history of a successfull forest DSS in Sweden‏‎ (4 revisions)
  190. Hungary.16‏‎ (4 revisions)
  191. Hungary.80‏‎ (4 revisions)
  192. South Africa.127‏‎ (4 revisions)
  193. WRR-DSS‏‎ (4 revisions)
  194. Germany.121‏‎ (4 revisions)
  195. Norway.95‏‎ (4 revisions)
  196. Estonia.124‏‎ (4 revisions)
  197. T4‏‎ (4 revisions)
  198. United States.65‏‎ (4 revisions)
  199. Forest multi-decision maker regional planning at the Portuguese Chamusca County‏‎ (4 revisions)
  200. It should be possible to specify the rotation time of a species not only by age but also by target‏‎ (4 revisions)
  201. Switzerland.117‏‎ (4 revisions)
  202. Switzerland.92‏‎ (4 revisions)
  203. Portugal-A Decision Support System for eucalypt forest management under climate change scenarios‏‎ (4 revisions)
  204. Portugal.41‏‎ (4 revisions)
  205. OpTimber-LP‏‎ (4 revisions)
  206. Portugal.108‏‎ (4 revisions)
  207. Slovenia.113‏‎ (4 revisions)
  208. Hungary.94‏‎ (4 revisions)
  209. Forest Maps‏‎ (4 revisions)
  210. Spain.102‏‎ (4 revisions)
  211. Ireland.84‏‎ (4 revisions)
  212. Spain.68‏‎ (4 revisions)
  213. 2. Exploring options‏‎ (4 revisions)
  214. Hungary.37‏‎ (4 revisions)
  215. Finland.1‏‎ (4 revisions)
  216. Denmark.5‏‎ (4 revisions)
  217. South Africa.47‏‎ (4 revisions)
  218. Germany.68‏‎ (4 revisions)
  219. Estonia.76‏‎ (4 revisions)
  220. CoPWorkingGroup‏‎ (4 revisions)
  221. Use of the DSS has been considered successful by the participating organizations, even though it has‏‎ (4 revisions)
  222. Russia.122‏‎ (4 revisions)
  223. Enabling the analyses of several ecosystem services (timber and non-timber resources) in one and the‏‎ (4 revisions)
  224. Spatial variation between regions led to the development of different regional models, which led to‏‎ (4 revisions)
  225. Chile.124‏‎ (4 revisions)
  226. STSM Opportunity MBMS development‏‎ (4 revisions)
  227. Switzerland.54‏‎ (4 revisions)
  228. Austria.111‏‎ (4 revisions)
  229. Slovenia.18‏‎ (4 revisions)
  230. Brazil-DSS usage at a company combining both short rotation plantations and natural forest management in their operation‏‎ (4 revisions)
  231. Portugal.75‏‎ (4 revisions)
  232. Greece.69‏‎ (4 revisions)
  233. Estonia.102‏‎ (4 revisions)
  234. Case Study Technical Committee‏‎ (4 revisions)
  235. Sweden.75‏‎ (4 revisions)
  236. United Kingdom.13‏‎ (4 revisions)
  237. Model building was rapid, it was assembling the data that took by far the most time‏‎ (4 revisions)
  238. TAURON.Decision support techniques‏‎ (4 revisions)
  239. Ireland.3‏‎ (4 revisions)
  240. Providing procedures and structure for data flow from selection of field sample, performing field‏‎ (4 revisions)
  241. Spain.33‏‎ (4 revisions)
  242. Spain.88‏‎ (4 revisions)
  243. SIPAFIT.Decision support techniques‏‎ (4 revisions)
  244. Hungary.122‏‎ (4 revisions)
  245. Finland.63‏‎ (4 revisions)
  246. DSS-WuK‏‎ (4 revisions)
  247. Denmark.75‏‎ (4 revisions)
  248. Germany.1‏‎ (4 revisions)
  249. End user engagement throughout the development and deployment cycle is very important‏‎ (4 revisions)
  250. China.43‏‎ (4 revisions)

View (previous 250 | next 250) (20 | 50 | 100 | 250 | 500)