IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/forpol/v30y2013icp14-22.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

How does real option value compare with Faustmann value in the context of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme?

Author

Listed:
  • Manley, Bruce

Abstract

Stochastic Dynamic Programming is used to determine the expected bare land value under the New Zealand ETS (Emissions Trading Scheme) with both log prices and carbon prices following a random walk. This value is substantially higher than the Faustmann NPV. This is in contrast to the situation without carbon where the difference is small and reduces as log price increases. When carbon is included, the difference in value is also large for existing stands and increases with stand age until at least the minimum harvest age is reached. Additional value comes from the flexibility of when to harvest and hence when carbon units have to be surrendered.

Suggested Citation

  • Manley, Bruce, 2013. "How does real option value compare with Faustmann value in the context of the New Zealand Emissions Trading Scheme?," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 30(C), pages 14-22.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:forpol:v:30:y:2013:i:c:p:14-22
    DOI: 10.1016/j.forpol.2013.02.001
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1389934113000130
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.forpol.2013.02.001?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. Graeme Guthrie & Dinesh Kumareswaran, 2009. "Carbon Subsidies, Taxes and Optimal Forest Management," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 43(2), pages 275-293, June.
    2. Manley, Bruce & Maclaren, Piers, 2012. "Potential impact of carbon trading on forest management in New Zealand," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 35-40.
    3. 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.
    4. 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.
    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. 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.
    2. Arthur Grimes & Sandra Cortés Acosta, 2021. "Permanent forest investment in a climate of uncertainty," Working Papers 21_04, Motu Economic and Public Policy Research.

    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. 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.
    2. 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 123665, International Association of Agricultural Economists.
    3. Dumortier, Jerome Robert Florian, 2011. "The impact of forest offset credits under a stochastic carbon price on agriculture using a rational expectations and real options framework," ISU General Staff Papers 201101010800001160, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    4. Tommi Ekholm, 2019. "Optimal forest rotation under carbon pricing and forest damage risk," Papers 1912.00269, arXiv.org.
    5. Sunderasan Srinivasan, 2015. "Economic valuation and option-based payments for ecosystem services," Mitigation and Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, Springer, vol. 20(7), pages 1055-1077, October.
    6. Thang, Tran Cong & Burton, Michael P. & Brennan, Donna C., 2009. "Optimal replanting and cutting rule for coffee farmers in Vietnam," 2009 Conference (53rd), February 11-13, 2009, Cairns, Australia 47638, Australian Agricultural and Resource Economics Society.
    7. 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.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. 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.
    11. Creamer, Selmin F. & Genz, Alan & Blatner, Keith A., 2012. "The Effect of Fire Risk on the Critical Harvesting Times for Pacific Northwest Douglas-Fir When Carbon Price Is Stochastic," Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, Northeastern Agricultural and Resource Economics Association, vol. 41(3), pages 1-14, December.
    12. Kerchner, Charles D. & Keeton, William S., 2015. "California's regulatory forest carbon market: Viability for northeast landowners," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 70-81.
    13. 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).
    14. Luca Vincenzo Ballestra & Graziella Pacelli & Davide Radi, 2017. "Valuing investment projects under interest rate risk: empirical evidence from European firms," Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 49(56), pages 5662-5672, December.
    15. Coleman, Andrew, 2018. "Forest-based carbon sequestration, and the role of forward, futures, and carbon-lending markets: A comparative institutions approach," Journal of Forest Economics, Elsevier, vol. 33(C), pages 95-104.
    16. Nghiem Thi Hong Nhung, 2016. "Optimal Forest Management for Carbon Sequestration: A Case Study of Eucalyptus urophylla and Acacia mangium in Yen Bai Province, Vietnam," EEPSEA Research Report rr2016046, Economy and Environment Program for Southeast Asia (EEPSEA), revised Apr 2016.
    17. Hervé-Mignucci, Morgan, 2011. "Rôle du signal prix du carbone sur les décisions d'investissement des entreprises," Economics Thesis from University Paris Dauphine, Paris Dauphine University, number 123456789/8200 edited by Keppler, Jan Horst.
    18. Tahvonen, Olli & Rautiainen, Aapo, 2017. "Economics of forest carbon storage and the additionality principle," Resource and Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 50(C), pages 124-134.
    19. Dumortier, Jerome & Kauffman, Nathan & Hayes, Dermot J., 2017. "Production and spatial distribution of switchgrass and miscanthus in the United States under uncertainty and sunk cost," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 300-314.
    20. 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.

    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:30:y:2013:i:c:p:14-22. 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.