IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v136y2017icp226-239.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic Opportunities and Trade-Offs in Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration

Author

Listed:
  • Ager, Alan A.
  • Vogler, Kevin C.
  • Day, Michelle A.
  • Bailey, John D.

Abstract

We modeled forest restoration scenarios to examine socioeconomic and ecological trade-offs associated with alternative prioritization scenarios. The study examined four US national forests designated as priorities for investments to restore fire resiliency and generate economic opportunities to support local industry. We were particularly interested in economic trade-offs that would result from prioritization of management activities to address forest departure and wildfire risk to the adjacent urban interface. The results showed strong trade-offs and scale effects on production possibility frontiers, and substantial variation among planning areas and national forests. The results pointed to spatially explicit priorities and opportunities to achieve restoration goals within the study area. However, optimizing revenue to help finance restoration projects led to a sharp reduction in the attainment of other socioecological objectives, especially reducing forest departure from historical conditions. The analytical framework and results can inform ongoing collaborative restoration planning to help stakeholders understand the opportunity cost of specific restoration objectives. This work represents one of the first spatially explicit, economic trade-off analyses of national forest restoration programs, and reveals the relative cost of different restoration strategies, as well scale-related changes in production frontiers associated with restoration investments.

Suggested Citation

  • Ager, Alan A. & Vogler, Kevin C. & Day, Michelle A. & Bailey, John D., 2017. "Economic Opportunities and Trade-Offs in Collaborative Forest Landscape Restoration," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 136(C), pages 226-239.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:136:y:2017:i:c:p:226-239
    DOI: 10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0921800916309892
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2017.01.001?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Hauer, Grant & Cumming, Steve & Schmiegelow, Fiona & Adamowicz, Wiktor & Weber, Marian & Jagodzinski, Robert, 2010. "Tradeoffs between forestry resource and conservation values under alternate policy regimes: A spatial analysis of the western Canadian boreal plains," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 221(21), pages 2590-2603.
    2. Rummer, Bob, 2008. "Assessing the cost of fuel reduction treatments: A critical review," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 355-362, August.
    3. Barbour, R. James & Fried, Jeremy S. & Daugherty, Peter J. & Christensen, Glenn & Fight, Roger, 2008. "Potential biomass and logs from fire-hazard-reduction treatments in Southwest Oregon and Northern California," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 400-407, August.
    4. Martin, David M. & Hermoso, Virgilio & Pantus, Francis & Olley, Jon & Linke, Simon & Poff, N. LeRoy, 2016. "A proposed framework to systematically design and objectively evaluate non-dominated restoration tradeoffs for watershed planning and management," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 146-155.
    5. Hartsough, Bruce R. & Abrams, Scott & Barbour, R. James & Drews, Erik S. & McIver, James D. & Moghaddas, Jason J. & Schwilk, Dylan W. & Stephens, Scott L., 2008. "The economics of alternative fuel reduction treatments in western United States dry forests: Financial and policy implications from the National Fire and Fire Surrogate Study," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 10(6), pages 344-354, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rossi, David & Kuusela, Olli-Pekka & Dunn, Christopher, 2022. "A microeconometric analysis of wildfire suppression decisions in the Western United States," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 200(C).
    2. Laudari, Hari Krishna & Aryal, Kishor & Maraseni, Tek & Pariyar, Shiva & Pant, Basant & Bhattarai, Sushma & Kaini, Tika Raj & Karki, Gyanendra & Marahattha, Anisha, 2022. "Sixty-five years of forest restoration in Nepal: Lessons learned and way forward," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 115(C).
    3. Secco, Laura & Pisani, Elena & Da Re, Riccardo & Rogelja, Todora & Burlando, Catie & Vicentini, Kamini & Pettenella, Davide & Masiero, Mauro & Miller, David & Nijnjk, Maria, 2019. "Towards a method of evaluating social innovation in forest-dependent rural communities: First suggestions from a science-stakeholder collaboration," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 9-22.
    4. Ager, Alan A. & Barros, Ana M.G. & Houtman, Rachel & Seli, Rob & Day, Michelle A., 2020. "Modelling the effect of accelerated forest management on long-term wildfire activity," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 421(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Pokharel, Raju & Latta, Gregory S., 2020. "A network analysis to identify forest merchantability limitations across the United States," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 116(C).
    2. Chai, Li & Saffron, Christopher M., 2016. "Comparing pelletization and torrefaction depots: Optimization of depot capacity and biomass moisture to determine the minimum production cost," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 387-395.
    3. Crandall, Mindy S. & Adams, Darius M. & Montgomery, Claire A. & Smith, David, 2017. "The potential rural development impacts of utilizing non-merchantable forest biomass," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 74(C), pages 20-29.
    4. José Roberto Ribas & Jorge Santos Ribas & Andrés Suárez García & Elena Arce Fariña & David González Peña & Ana García Rodríguez, 2021. "A Multicriteria Evaluation of Sustainable Riparian Revegetation with Local Fruit Trees around a Reservoir of a Hydroelectric Power Plant in Central Brazil," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(14), pages 1-16, July.
    5. Ruijs, A. & Wossink, A. & Kortelainen, M. & Alkemade, R. & Schulp, C.J.E., 2013. "Trade-off analysis of ecosystem services in Eastern Europe," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 4(C), pages 82-94.
    6. Jones, Kelly W. & Gannon, Benjamin & Timberlake, Thomas & Chamberlain, James L. & Wolk, Brett, 2022. "Societal benefits from wildfire mitigation activities through payments for watershed services: Insights from Colorado," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 135(C).
    7. Richard R Schneider & Grant Hauer & Dan Farr & W L Adamowicz & Stan Boutin, 2011. "Achieving Conservation when Opportunity Costs Are High: Optimizing Reserve Design in Alberta's Oil Sands Region," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(8), pages 1-8, August.
    8. Belavenutti, Pedro & Ager, Alan A. & Day, Michelle A. & Chung, Woodam, 2022. "Designing forest restoration projects to optimize the application of broadcast burning," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 201(C).
    9. Knoke, Thomas & Gosling, Elizabeth & Paul, Carola, 2020. "Use and misuse of the net present value in environmental studies," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 174(C).
    10. Canadas, Maria João & Leal, Miguel & Soares, Filipa & Novais, Ana & Ribeiro, Paulo Flores & Schmidt, Luísa & Delicado, Ana & Moreira, Francisco & Bergonse, Rafaello & Oliveira, Sandra & Madeira, Paulo, 2023. "Wildfire mitigation and adaptation: Two locally independent actions supported by different policy domains," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 124(C).
    11. Fischer, A. Paige, 2012. "Identifying policy target groups with qualitative and quantitative methods: The case of wildfire risk on nonindustrial private forest lands," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(C), pages 62-71.
    12. Young, Jesse D. & Anderson, Nathaniel M. & Naughton, Helen T. & Mullan, Katrina, 2018. "Economic and policy factors driving adoption of institutional woody biomass heating systems in the U.S," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 69(C), pages 456-470.
    13. Miguel RIVIERE & Sylvain CAURLA, 2018. "Integrating non-timber objectives into bio-economic models of the forest sector: a review of recent innovations and current shortcomings," Working Papers of BETA 2018-26, Bureau d'Economie Théorique et Appliquée, UDS, Strasbourg.
    14. Young, Jesse D. & Ager, Alan A., 2024. "Resource objective wildfire leveraged to restore old growth forest structure while stabilizing carbon stocks in the southwestern United States," Ecological Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 488(C).
    15. Spinelli, Raffaele & Magagnotti, Natascia, 2010. "A tool for productivity and cost forecasting of decentralised wood chipping," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(3), pages 194-198, March.
    16. Iritie, Jean-Jacques, 2015. "Economic Growth, Biodiversity and Conservation Policies in Africa: an Overview," MPRA Paper 62005, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    17. José Roberto Ribas & Juan Ignacio Perez Diaz, 2019. "Assessment of Sustainable Use of a Multipurpose Reservoir through the Multicriteria Approach: the Case of Corumbá IV Reservoir, Brazil," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 33(2), pages 591-602, January.
    18. Liye Wang & Xinli Ke & Assem Abu Hatab, 2020. "Trade-Offs between Economic Benefits and Ecosystem Services Value under Three Cropland Protection Scenarios for Wuhan City in China," Land, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    19. Richard R Schneider & Grant Hauer & Kimberly Dawe & Wiktor Adamowicz & Stan Boutin, 2012. "Selection of Reserves for Woodland Caribou Using an Optimization Approach," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 7(2), pages 1-9, February.
    20. Drolet, Steve & LeBel, Luc, 2010. "Forest harvesting entrepreneurs, perception of their business status and its influence on performance evaluation," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 287-298, April.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:ecolec:v:136:y:2017:i:c:p:226-239. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/ecolecon .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.