Green Practices Guideline for Forest Operation

3. Time analysis: This involves analysing the amount of time required to implement the evaluation method, including the time required for data collection, analysis, and reporting. (a) On a scale of 1-5, how much time is required to set up this evaluation method? (1 = very little time, 5 = a significant amount of time) (b) On a scale of 1-5, how much time is required for data collection with this evaluation method? (1 = very little time, 5 = a significant amount of time) (c) On a scale of 1-5, how much time is required for data analysis with this evaluation method? (1 = very little time, 5 = a significant amount of time) (d) On a scale of 1-5, how much time is required for reporting with this evaluation method? (1 = very little time, 5 = a significant amount of time) (e) On a scale of 1-5, how often does the data need to be updated with this evaluation method? (1 = rarely, 5 = frequently) (f) On a scale of 1-5, how much of an impact does this evaluation method have on staff time? (1 = no impact, 5 = significant impact) (g) On a scale of 1-5, how much of an impact does this evaluation method have on the project timeline? (1 = no impact, 5 = significant impact) (h) 8. On a scale of 1-5, how well does this evaluation method fit within the overall project schedule? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (i) On a scale of 1-5, how much flexibility is there to adjust the timing of data collection and analysis with this evaluation method? (1 = very little flexibility, 5 = a lot of flexibility) (j) On a scale of 1-5, how much time is required for training personnel to use this evaluation method? (1 = very little time, 5 = a significant amount of time) 4. Pilot testing: This involves testing a small-scale version of the evaluation method to identify any potential issues or challenges that need to be addressed before full implementation. (a) On a scale of 1-5, how well did this evaluation method perform during the pilot test? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (b) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method meet the needs of the test participants? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (c) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method achieve the desired outcomes? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (d) On a scale of 1-5, how much feedback did test participants provide about the evaluation method? (1 = very little feedback, 5 = a lot of feedback) (e) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method perform compared to other similar methods tested? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (f) On a scale of 1-5, how feasible is it to implement this evaluation method on a larger scale? (1 = not feasible at all, 5 = extremely feasible) (g) On a scale of 1-5, how much of an impact did the evaluation method have on the pilot test participants? (1 = no impact, 5 = significant impact) (h) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method perform in terms of data accuracy? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (i) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method perform in terms of data reliability? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) (j) On a scale of 1-5, how well did the evaluation method perform in terms of data validity? (1 = not well at all, 5 = extremely well) 113 GREEN PRACTICES GUIDELINE FOR FOREST OPERATION