IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v22y2012icp65-71.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Carbon sequestration and uneven-aged management of loblolly pine stands in the Southern USA: A joint optimization approach

Author

Listed:
  • Parajuli, Rajan
  • Chang, Sun Joseph

Abstract

Forest carbon sequestration is regarded as a viable and cost effective option for reducing global greenhouse gas emissions. Several studies have analyzed the effects of joint management of carbon and timber under different even-aged forest management scenarios. However, research specifically focused on the inclusion of carbon sequestration benefits into uneven-aged management has received little attention. Using the USDA Forest Vegetation Simulator (FVS)-Southern Variant to generate growth and yield data, this study assessed management and financial effects of carbon benefits on the optimum uneven-aged management of loblolly pine stands. We applied the generalized Faustmann formula for uneven-aged management to calculate the land expectation value (LEV) at various levels of residual basal area and cutting cycle. Considering a biologically maximum stocking of 80ft2/acre immediately before the harvest, this study determined the optimum management regimes of uneven-aged loblolly pine stands. This study also carried out sensitivity analyses to assess the effects of changes in interest rate, stumpage prices, and future land value and site productivity. In the joint management scenarios of timber production and carbon sequestration, carbon benefits could not alter the optimum management regimes of uneven-aged loblolly pine stands significantly. The stumpage prices and future land values were found to be less influential to the optimum joint management regimes. The percentage increase in financial returns was relatively more prominent in less productive sites.

Suggested Citation

  • Parajuli, Rajan & Chang, Sun Joseph, 2012. "Carbon sequestration and uneven-aged management of loblolly pine stands in the Southern USA: A joint optimization approach," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 22(C), pages 65-71.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:22:y:2012:i:c:p:65-71
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2012.05.003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934112001128
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2012.05.003?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. Sedjo, Roger A. & Sohngen, Brent & Mendelsohn, Robert, 2001. "Estimating Carbon Supply Curves for Global Forests and Other Land Uses," Discussion Papers 10663, Resources for the Future.
    2. Sedjo, Roger, 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," RFF Working Paper Series dp-01-34, Resources for the Future.
    3. Köthke, Margret & Dieter, Matthias, 2010. "Effects of carbon sequestration rewards on forest management--An empirical application of adjusted Faustmann Formulae," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 589-597, October.
    4. Asante, Patrick & Armstrong, Glen W. & Adamowicz, Wiktor L., 2011. "Carbon sequestration and the optimal forest harvest decision: A dynamic programming approach considering biomass and dead organic matter," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(1), pages 3-17, January.
    5. Sedjo, Roger A., 2001. "Forest Carbon Sequestration: Some Issues for Forest Investments," Discussion Papers 10571, Resources for the Future.
    6. Hartman, Richard, 1976. "The Harvesting Decision When a Standing Forest Has Value," Economic Inquiry, Western Economic Association International, vol. 14(1), pages 52-58, March.
    7. Andrew Stainback, G. & Alavalapati, Janaki R.R., 2002. "Economic analysis of slash pine forest carbon sequestration in the southern U. S," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(2), pages 105-117.
    8. Olschewski, Roland & Benítez, Pablo C., 2010. "Optimizing joint production of timber and carbon sequestration of afforestation projects," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(1), pages 1-10, January.
    9. Newell, Richard G. & Stavins, Robert N., 2000. "Climate Change and Forest Sinks: Factors Affecting the Costs of Carbon Sequestration," Journal of Environmental Economics and Management, Elsevier, vol. 40(3), pages 211-235, November.
    10. Chang, Sun Joseph & Gadow, Klaus V., 2010. "Application of the generalized Faustmann model to uneven-aged forest management," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4), pages 313-325, December.
    11. G. Cornelis van Kooten & Clark S. Binkley & Gregg Delcourt, 1995. "Effect of Carbon Taxes and Subsidies on Optimal Forest Rotation Age and Supply of Carbon Services," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 77(2), pages 365-374.
    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. Luis U. Castruita-Esparza & Raúl Narváez-Flores & Mélida Gutiérrez & Aldo S. Mojica-Guerrero & Gerónimo Quiñones-Barraza & Javier Hernández-Salas, 2024. "Structure and Carbon Capture of a Temperate Mixed Forest across Altitudinal Gradients in Northern Mexico," Land, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-17, April.
    2. Chang, Sun Joseph, 2018. "Forest property taxation under the generalized Faustmann formula," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(C), pages 38-45.
    3. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nghiem, Nhung, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation by farm income levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 185-194.
    4. Chang, Sun Joseph, 2020. "Twenty one years after the publication of the generalized Faustmann formula," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    5. Kovacs, Kent F. & Haight, Robert G. & Moore, Karli & Popp, Michael, 2021. "Afforestation for carbon sequestration in the Lower Mississippi River Basin of Arkansas, USA: Does modeling of land use at fine spatial resolution reveal lower carbon cost?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    6. Susaeta, Andres & Chang, Sun Joseph & Carter, Douglas R. & Lal, Pankaj, 2014. "Economics of carbon sequestration under fluctuating economic environment, forest management and technological changes: An application to forest stands in the southern United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 47-64.
    7. Paul W. Fischer & Alison C. Cullen & Gregory J. Ettl, 2017. "The Effect of Forest Management Strategy on Carbon Storage and Revenue in Western Washington: A Probabilistic Simulation of Tradeoffs," Risk Analysis, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 37(1), pages 173-192, January.

    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. Susaeta, Andres & Chang, Sun Joseph & Carter, Douglas R. & Lal, Pankaj, 2014. "Economics of carbon sequestration under fluctuating economic environment, forest management and technological changes: An application to forest stands in the southern United States," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 47-64.
    2. Nguyen, Trung Thanh & Nghiem, Nhung, 2016. "Optimal forest rotation for carbon sequestration and biodiversity conservation by farm income levels," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 73(C), pages 185-194.
    3. Couture, Stéphane & Reynaud, Arnaud, 2011. "Forest management under fire risk when forest carbon sequestration has value," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 70(11), pages 2002-2011, September.
    4. Yu, Jinna & Yao, Shunbo & Zhang, Bisheng, 2014. "Designing afforestation subsidies that account for the benefits of carbon sequestration: A case study using data from China's Loess Plateau," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(1), pages 65-76.
    5. Köthke, Margret & Dieter, Matthias, 2010. "Effects of carbon sequestration rewards on forest management--An empirical application of adjusted Faustmann Formulae," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 12(8), pages 589-597, October.
    6. West, Thales A.P. & Wilson, Chris & Vrachioli, Maria & Grogan, Kelly A., 2019. "Carbon payments for extended rotations in forest plantations: Conflicting insights from a theoretical model," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 70-76.
    7. Susaeta, Andres & Adams, Damian C. & Gonzalez-Benecke, Carlos, 2017. "Economic vulnerability of southern US slash pine forests to climate change," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 28(C), pages 18-32.
    8. Dwivedi, Puneet & Bailis, Robert & Stainback, Andrew & Carter, Douglas R., 2012. "Impact of payments for carbon sequestered in wood products and avoided carbon emissions on the profitability of NIPF landowners in the US South," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 78(C), pages 63-69.
    9. Indrajaya, Yonky & van der Werf, Edwin & Weikard, Hans-Peter & Mohren, Frits & van Ierland, Ekko C., 2016. "The potential of REDD+ for carbon sequestration in tropical forests: Supply curves for carbon storage for Kalimantan, Indonesia," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 71(C), pages 1-10.
    10. Jin Zhang & Rong-Gang Cong & Berit Hasler, 2018. "Sustainable Management of Oleaginous Trees as a Source for Renewable Energy Supply and Climate Change Mitigation: A Case Study in China," Energies, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-23, May.
    11. Asante, Patrick & Armstrong, Glen W., 2012. "Optimal forest harvest age considering carbon sequestration in multiple carbon pools: A comparative statics analysis," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 145-156.
    12. Rørstad, Per Kristian, 2022. "Payment for CO2 sequestration affects the Faustmann rotation period in Norway more than albedo payment does," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 199(C).
    13. Price, Colin & Willis, Rob, 2011. "The multiple effects of carbon values on optimal rotation," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 17(3), pages 298-306, August.
    14. Hoel, Michael & Holtsmark, Bjart & Holtsmark, Katinka, 2014. "Faustmann and the climate," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 20(2), pages 192-210.
    15. Miettinen, Jenni & Ollikainen, Markku & Nieminen, Tiina M. & Ukonmaanaho, Liisa & Laurén, Ari & Hynynen, Jari & Lehtonen, Mika & Valsta, Lauri, 2014. "Whole-tree harvesting with stump removal versus stem-only harvesting in peatlands when water quality, biodiversity conservation and climate change mitigation matter," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 25-35.
    16. Moeller, Jonas C. & Susaeta, Andres & Deegen, Peter & Sharma, Ajay, 2024. "Profitability analysis of southern plantations through timber alone or timber and carbon integration in pine-sweetgum mixes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 161(C).
    17. Im, Eun Ho & Adams, Darius M. & Latta, Gregory S., 2007. "Potential impacts of carbon taxes on carbon flux in western Oregon private forests," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 9(8), pages 1006-1017, May.
    18. Kovacs, Kent F. & Haight, Robert G. & Moore, Karli & Popp, Michael, 2021. "Afforestation for carbon sequestration in the Lower Mississippi River Basin of Arkansas, USA: Does modeling of land use at fine spatial resolution reveal lower carbon cost?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 130(C).
    19. Dymond, Caren Christine & Giles-Hansen, Krysta & Asante, Patrick, 2020. "The forest mitigation-adaptation nexus: Economic benefits of novel planting regimes," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    20. Zhou, Wei & Gao, Lan, 2016. "The impact of carbon trade on the management of short-rotation forest plantations," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 62(C), pages 30-35.

    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:22:y:2012:i:c:p:65-71. 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.