IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v12y2010i5p377-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of various sources of uncertainty in stand-level net present value estimates

Author

Listed:
  • Holopainen, Markus
  • Mäkinen, Antti
  • Rasinmäki, Jussi
  • Hyytiäinen, Kari
  • Bayazidi, Saeed
  • Pietilä, Ilona

Abstract

The objective of this study was to compare the relative importance of various sources of uncertainties in determining the net present value of forest stands and forested property. This was achieved by performing stand-level simulations that took into account: i) input data errors (airborne laser-scanning data vs. ocular standwise field inventory data), ii) stochastic future development of timber assortment prices and iii) errors in stand-level growth projection models. The starting point of the study was a simulated forest estate comprising 40 stands of various types sufficiently represented (e.g. with respect to species composition, development class distribution, and site quality). Stochastic timber price models were formulated, employing geometric mean-reverting principles. The results showed that sources of uncertainty all had significant effects on the probability distribution of the net present value of the stand. The relative standard deviations of stand net present values averaged 8% for stochastic timber price, 29% for errors in standwise field inventory data, 26% for errors in airborne laser-scanning data and 33% for errors in growth projection models when applying a 3% discount rate. When all three sources of uncertainty were analysed simultaneously, the highest average standard deviation was 47.4%. Interestingly, errors in the growth projections and the quality of inventory data contributed more to the variation in stand net present value than fluctuation in timber price did, although this result was based on the assumption that the forestry industry maintains its competitiveness in the long run. Our modeling approach made it possible to compare various sources of uncertainty and to set confidence intervals for net present value estimates. This approach can also result in information on which sources of uncertainty are focused.

Suggested Citation

  • Holopainen, Markus & Mäkinen, Antti & Rasinmäki, Jussi & Hyytiäinen, Kari & Bayazidi, Saeed & Pietilä, Ilona, 2010. "Comparison of various sources of uncertainty in stand-level net present value estimates," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(5), pages 377-386, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:5:p:377-386
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389-9341(10)00025-0
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    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. Insley, Margaret, 2002. "A Real Options Approach to the Valuation of a Forestry Investment," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 471-492, November.
    2. Alvarez, Luis H.R. & Koskela, Erkki, 2007. "Optimal harvesting under resource stock and price uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 2461-2485, July.
    3. Margaret Insley & Kimberly Rollins, 2005. "On Solving the Multirotational Timber Harvesting Problem with Stochastic Prices: A Linear Complementarity Formulation," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 87(3), pages 735-755.
    4. Yoshimoto, Atsushi & Shoji, Isao, 1998. "Searching for an optimal rotation age for forest stand management under stochastic log prices," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 105(1), pages 100-112, February.
    5. Thomas A. Thomson, 1992. "Optimal Forest Rotation When Stumpage Prices Follow a Diffusion Process," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 68(3), pages 329-342.
    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. Petković, Dalibor & Shamshirband, Shahaboddin & Kamsin, Amirrudin & Lee, Malrey & Anicic, Obrad & Nikolić, Vlastimir, 2016. "Survey of the most influential parameters on the wind farm net present value (NPV) by adaptive neuro-fuzzy approach," Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1270-1278.
    2. Kärkkäinen, Leena & Haakana, Helena & Hirvelä, Hannu & Packalen, Tuula, 2019. "Using a decision support system to study impacts of land use policies on wood procurement possibilities of the sawmill industry – A case study at regional and municipal levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 136-146.
    3. Petr, Michal & Boerboom, Luc & Ray, Duncan & van der Veen, Anne, 2014. "An uncertainty assessment framework for forest planning adaptation to climate change," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 41(C), pages 1-11.

    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. Adriana Piazza & Bernardo Pagnoncelli, 2015. "The stochastic Mitra–Wan forestry model: risk neutral and risk averse cases," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 115(2), pages 175-194, June.
    2. Hildebrandt, Patrick & Knoke, Thomas, 2011. "Investment decisions under uncertainty--A methodological review on forest science studies," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 13(1), pages 1-15, January.
    3. Insley, M.C. & Wirjanto, T.S., 2010. "Contrasting two approaches in real options valuation: Contingent claims versus dynamic programming," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2), pages 157-176, April.
    4. Rakotoarison, Hanitra & Loisel, Patrice, 2016. "The Faustmann model under storm risk and price uncertainty: A case study of European beech in Northwestern France," MPRA Paper 85114, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Chang, Sun Joseph & Zhang, Fan, 2023. "Active timber management by outsourcing stumpage price uncertainty with the American put option," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 154(C).
    6. Buongiorno, Joseph & Zhou, Mo, 2011. "Further generalization of Faustmann's formula for stochastic interest rates," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 248-257, August.
    7. Work, J. & Qiu, F. & Luckert, M.K., 2016. "Examining hardwood pulp and ethanol prices for improved poplar plantations in Canada," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 9-15.
    8. Tee, James & Scarpa, Riccardo & Marsh, Dan & Guthrie, Graeme, 2012. "Valuation of Carbon Forestry and the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme: A Real Options Approach Using the Binomial Tree Method," 2012 Conference, August 18-24, 2012, Foz do Iguacu, Brazil 131066, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    9. Ben Abdallah, Skander & Lasserre, Pierre, 2016. "Asset retirement with infinitely repeated alternative replacements: Harvest age and species choice in forestry," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 70(C), pages 144-164.
    10. Guo, Christopher & Costello, Christopher, 2013. "The value of adaption: Climate change and timberland management," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 65(3), pages 452-468.
    11. Bernardo K. Pagnoncelli & Adriana Piazza, 2017. "The optimal harvesting problem under price uncertainty: the risk averse case," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 258(2), pages 479-502, November.
    12. Alvarez, Luis H.R. & Koskela, Erkki, 2007. "Optimal harvesting under resource stock and price uncertainty," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 31(7), pages 2461-2485, July.
    13. Chladna, Zuzana, 2007. "Determination of optimal rotation period under stochastic wood and carbon prices," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1031-1045, May.
    14. James Tee & Riccardo Scarpa & Dan Marsh & Graeme Guthrie, 2014. "Forest Valuation under the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme: A Real Options Binomial Tree with Stochastic Carbon and Timber Prices," Land Economics, University of Wisconsin Press, vol. 90(1), pages 44-60.
    15. Manley, Bruce & Niquidet, Kurt, 2010. "What is the relevance of option pricing for forest valuation in New Zealand?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(4), pages 299-307, April.
    16. Chen, Shan & Insley, Margaret, 2012. "Regime switching in stochastic models of commodity prices: An application to an optimal tree harvesting problem," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(2), pages 201-219.
    17. Manley, Bruce & Niquidet, Kurt, 2017. "How does real option value compare with Faustmann value when log prices follow fractional Brownian motion?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 85(P1), pages 76-84.
    18. Esther W. Mezey & Jon M. Conrad, 2010. "Real Options in Resource Economics," Annual Review of Resource Economics, Annual Reviews, vol. 2(1), pages 33-52, October.
    19. Tahvonen, Olli & Suominen, Antti & Malo, Pekka & Viitasaari, Lauri & Parkatti, Vesa-Pekka, 2022. "Optimizing high-dimensional stochastic forestry via reinforcement learning," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 145(C).
    20. C. E. Dangerfield & A. E. Whalley & N. Hanley & C. A. Gilligan, 2018. "What a Difference a Stochastic Process Makes: Epidemiological-Based Real Options Models of Optimal Treatment of Disease," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 70(3), pages 691-711, July.

    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:forpol:v:12:y:2010:i:5:p:377-386. 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/forpol .

    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.