## 2 Decision Support System
### The Simulation Tool
#### 2.4.1 User Interface
\begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt} p{142.3 pt}} \hline \hline
**Management Actions** & **Parameters** & **Expected Effect on ESs** \\ \hline \multirow{8}{*}{Harvest} & _Granularity:_ stand, species, and age group. & _Positive:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The species and age group to be removed; & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Year and month of the harvest; & Carbon sequestration \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The type of harvest (continuous-cover forest or gap); & Recreation \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The type of regeneration (natural or artificial); & Air quality \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The type of protection for the regeneration (fencing, single tree protection, or removal of competition). & Biodiversity \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Case specific:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & & Water protection \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand, species, and age group. & _Positive:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The type of thinning: standard (following the recommended thinning itineraries) or custom (user-defined via the specific template). & Carbon sequestration \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand and species. & _Case specific:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Initial and final age for pre-commercial thinning; & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Frequency of the interventions. & _Positive:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand. & _Granularity:_ Air quality \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Stand to be set aside. & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand, species, and age group. & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Number of trees per hectase to be retained as habitat trees. & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand. & _Positive:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Type of maintenance: none, low (only path maintenance), or high (path and infrastructure maintenance). & _Positive:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & & _Granularity:_ stand, species, and regeneration age. & _Negative:_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & The type of protection for the regeneration (fencing, single tree protection, or removal of competition); & _Water protection_ \\ \cline{2-3}  & \(\bullet\) & Whether young stand cleaning is carried out or not. & _Positive:_ \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 2: Management actions and expected links to ES provision. The tool can simulate two management alternatives simultaneously; it suffices to load the completed management templates. The templates are spreadsheets in XLS format (a commonly used format among forest practitioners). The use of a spreadsheet allows management template files to be easily stored and the parameter set to be recalled to replicate the same simulation over time. Once the simulation is completed, the tool shows two result tables: the first table compares the cumulative values of the ES indicators under the two management alternatives, and the second table presents the direct and indirect economic costs as well as the revenues for each management alternative (the full list of ES indicators and economic values is presented in Table 3). The economic values are computed from the biophysical ones using predefined parameters, which include timber prices for each tree species, as well as costs associated with planting, fencing, thinning, harvesting, and trail maintenance. The user has the option of changing any values in the template provided. Both the ES indicators and the economic values are aggregated at the forest property level. The tool offers the possibility to download the disaggregated results in a spreadsheet format. ES indicators and economic values can be further analysed at a monthly resolution for each management unit within the forest property. A graphical comparison of the two management alternatives is offered by a radar plot of ES indicators, individually rescaled on a scale of 1 to 10 to provide meaningful visualisation.