In recent years, various versions of A’WOT approach has been used in many different areas worldwide (Kangas et al. 2016). However, AHP applications in forestry, agriculture, and natural resources were limited till 2000 (Schmoldt et al. 2001). In 2000, the hybrid method A’WOT, which combines the use of Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and SWOT, was presented by Kurttila et al. (2000) who applied it to natural resource management (Kangas et al. 2016). Immediately after the concept of A'WOT was first applied in Finnish forestry, a similar method was used for tourism management, in exploring the potential of silvo-pasture adoption in south-central Florida (Kajanus et al. 2004, Shrestha et al. 2013). Stewart et al. (2002) used exactly the same A’WOT version as before in an information technology management case study. Later it was used in selection of management scenario in the Finnish Forest and Park Service (Pesonen et al. 2001). Yuksel &
Dagdeviren (2010) advanced to the next level. That is, they assumed that the SWOT factors presented in the hierarchical structure were not mutually independent and because the AHP model has some shortcomings.
The natural resource management is a complex phenomenon that contains wide range of attributes and wider scope. Hence, decision making process should wise and strategic to combat the complexity of natural resource management (Kaya & Kahraman 2000). The complexity of most natural resource issues today is increasing because of the way in which different social groups or stakeholders understand the importance of standards they adopt. On the other hand, the traditional SWOT analysis, which also implies optional ranking of criteria and sub criteria, although independently without taking into consideration of the potential interaction between them, is not sufficient for implementation of many practical situations. In order to overcome these shortcomings, SWOT analysis had been combined with multi-criteria decision-making methods (MCDM). A multi-criteria decision-making tool is especially useful for solving problems that
determine or express preferences, or for making decisions based on several contradictory indicators of competing for importance. This allows for simultaneous distribution of generated strategies based on the interaction between multiple SWOT factors and subfactors, providing a good basis for solving many operational problems. Many researchers have tried to use different MCDM methods with SWOT analysis as an effective approach for the natural resource management.
SWOT-SMART analysis is an important tool to find out internal (strengths and weaknesses) and external (opportunities and threats) factors in any Community Forestry. Since local people have important role in CFM, their perspective on SWOT factors can have significant input in effective implementation of management and policy formulation process. Therefore, it is necessary to incorporate CFUGs feedback and opinions in the decision-making process. In this study, SWOT-SMART analysis will try to find out the positive and negative aspects of community forestry along with their ranking. Therefore, it will provide an opportunity to inform decision makers about the strengths and opportunities of community forestry and potential weaknesses along with threats.
After the introduction of Community Forestry, the forest priorities have been shifted from forest products supply (Gilmour & Fisher 1991) to establishment of good forest governance and to make productive forest by maximizing the economic benefit (Hobley 1996). At present, it is more intended towards commercialization of those forest products in a sustainable way (Paudel et al.
2010). Due to this change, on one hand, community forestry was moving towards more systematic management of economic resources but on the other hand it allows corruption and mismanagement in some cases (Paudel et al. 2010). Apart from this, there are other numerous issues such as men and elite dominancy, social exclusion, lack of transparency and accountability etc. which can be still seen in community forestry. In the same way, future of community forestry depends on the present actions and decisions being made. Thus, in order to continue making community forestry as a successful program in the future, it is very necessary for the decisions makers about the factors that could affect community forestry along with the shifting scenario. Therefore, this study tries to collect information about the overall internal and external factors of CF in Nepal which might be supportive for the decision makers for sustainable management of community forests.
The use of hybrid methods in practical applications have gained increasing support by researchers and practitioners. Belton and Stewart (2002) pointed the importance of such integrated approach,
such as hybrid methods, or other various MCDM methods combined together to a decision problem, can be more effective in actual ground. The basic A’WOT methodology was developed and enhanced. Thus, Kajanus et al. (2012) in their further research instead of the AHP use SMART (Simple Multi-Attribute Rating Technique) in combination with the SWOT analysis.
In their review article, Kangas et al. (2016) expected still wider application of the hybrid approach, applying also voting techniques and other MCDM methods than just AHP. Already in 2001, the book “The analytic hierarchy process in natural resource and environmental decision making”
(Scholdt et al. 2001) was published which constituted the updated compendium of applications of the AHP in natural and environmental management until 2001. The book briefly reviews some of the applications of the AHP for forestry and natural resources. From then to now, inevitably, A’WOT has been used and applied in the wider field of natural resources management.