20.500.12556/RUL-185583 A novel approach for assessing the importance of forest ecosystem services using indicators of potential and demand Identifying the potential and demand for forest ecosystem services (FES) in a spatially explicit manner is crucial for multi-objective forest management. We developed a robust and transparent procedure for i) selecting indicators for assessing the potential and demand for three FES (timber production, recreation and nature conservation) and ii) determining their relative importance (weights) as perceived by forest planning experts from four European countries (Estonia, Finland, Poland and Slovenia) with different forestry traditions. A total of 19 indicators of FES potential and 10 of FES demand, linked to each of the three FES, were selected based on established indicators that were updated and downscaled through iterative, multistep group communication. The selected indicators describe site and stand characteristics, accessibility, infrastructure and attractiveness, legal status and forest use. Indicators describing expert assessments of FES potential and demand were also included. We applied the fuzzy Best-Worst Method to derive weights for FES indicators incorporating experts' preferences. For FES potential, evidence-based indicators relying on empirical data received higher weights, whereas for FES demand, expert-based assessments were prioritized. Pairwise statistical comparisons of indicator weights revealed notable differences in the importance assigned by experts across countries. By considering both the potential and demand for FES and combining evidence-based indicators with expert preferences, we contribute to a comprehensive and context-sensitive framework for FES assessment. Our approach enables forest planners to identify priority areas for promoting desired FES and tailor management strategies that balance multiple FES, ensuring that decisions align with ecological potential and societal demand. indicators prioritization multi-criteria decision making best-worst method (BWM) participatory methods forest planning experts kazalniki prioritizacija večkriterijsko odločanje metoda najboljše-najslabše participativne metode gozdarski načrtovalci true false true Angleški jezik Slovenski jezik Članek v reviji 2026-08-11 11:41:16 2026-08-11 11:41:26 2026-08-12 04:03:48 0000-00-00 00:00:00 2026 0 0 13 str. art. 101895 Vol. 81 Oct. 2026 0000-00-00 Zaloznikova Objavljeno NiDoloceno 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 0000-00-00 [630*12+630*62]:519.816 2212-0416 10.1016/j.ecoser.2026.101895 287369987 RAZ_Simoncic_Tina_2026.pdf RAZ_Simoncic_Tina_2026.pdf 1 EEC8D523B846E6E8341F41E7E9230A00 21ce65b9827612cab6aa988db06fde2b917bb09c8017b5439f641d1c27dba93f d725dee8-956c-11f1-9b0d-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=244258 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212041626000835 1 79b2852e-9568-11f1-9b0d-0050569b8976 https://repozitorij.uni-lj.si/Dokument.php?lang=slv&id=244249 Biotehniška fakulteta 0 0 0