Difference between revisions of "AFFOREST-sDSS.Knowledge management process"

From forestDSS
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 4: Line 4:
 
|Has KM techniques to unspecificed process=Best Practices
 
|Has KM techniques to unspecificed process=Best Practices
 
}}
 
}}
 +
S. GILLIAMS1,*, J. VAN ORSHOVEN1, B. MUYS1, H. KROS2,(2005).G.W. HEIL3 and W. VAN DEURSEN4AFFOREST sDSS: a metamodel based spatial decision support system for afforestation of agricultural land.New Forests (2005) 30:33–53
 +
 
The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (2001).Afforestation management in north-western Europe influence on nitrogen leaching, groundwater recharge, and carbon sequestration.
 
The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (2001).Afforestation management in north-western Europe influence on nitrogen leaching, groundwater recharge, and carbon sequestration.
  

Revision as of 14:05, 30 April 2015

Knowledge management process

Supports KM process Knowledge Generation
Has KM techniques to identify and structure knowledge
Has KM techniques to transfer and share knowledge
Has KM techniques to analyse and apply knowledge Expert System, Intelligent Agent
Has KM techniques to unspecificed process Best Practices

S. GILLIAMS1,*, J. VAN ORSHOVEN1, B. MUYS1, H. KROS2,(2005).G.W. HEIL3 and W. VAN DEURSEN4AFFOREST sDSS: a metamodel based spatial decision support system for afforestation of agricultural land.New Forests (2005) 30:33–53

The Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research (2001).Afforestation management in north-western Europe influence on nitrogen leaching, groundwater recharge, and carbon sequestration.

Hansen, K. (ed.) (2002). Planning afforestation on previously managed arable land - influence on deposition, nitrate leaching, and carbon sequestration, http://www.fsl.dk/afforest.

S. Gilliams ∗, D. Raymaekers, B. Muys, J. Van Orshoven (2005)Comparing multiple criteria decision methods to extend a geographical information system on afforestation.Computers and Electronics in Agriculture 49 (2005) 142–158